Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program. Implementation Assessment and Plan. November 21, 2008

Transcription

1 Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Implementation Assessment and Plan November 21, 2008

2 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary What is an Express Lane? Why Implement an Express Lane Network? Will Express Lanes Work in Santa Clara? How Soon Can This Happen? How Much Will This Cost? How Will VTA Finance This Program? Funding Project Funding Projects 2 and Overview Background Southbound I-680 Express Lane Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Goals Efficient Use of Existing Infrastructure Mobility Option that Saves Time Source of Additional Revenue Preliminary Engineering of SR 85 and US Evaluation of I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors Strategic Considerations Feasibility Study Conclusions Regional HOT Lane Development Implementation Plan (Project Phasing) Funding Approach Proposed Express Lanes Concept Preliminary Engineering Assessment Approach for SR 85 and US Approach for I-880/SR 237 Connectors Toll Operations Lane Operation Customer Service and Account Management Enforcement Geometric Analysis Geometric Requirements Cost Estimates Traffic Forecasting and Analysis Forecast Model Process and Assumptions Forecasted Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Analysis Process and Assumptions Findings I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors Revenue Forecasting and Funding Options Forecasting for SR 85 and US 101 Methodology Forecasts by Project Funding Options Page 2 of 86

3 6. Public Opinion Summary Perceptions Concerns Education, Outreach and Communication Strategies Conclusions SR US I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors Recommendations Implementation Plan (Project Phasing) Project funding Board Actions Appendices Appendix A: Project Schedule Appendix B: Striping Details Appendix C: Access Point Details Findings on SR Findings on US Appendix D: Project Cost Estimates Appendix E: Traffic Forecasts Appendix F: Revenue Forecast Appendix G: MTC Express Lane Implementing Principles Table of Figures Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Toll Revenue... 8 Figure Map of Silicon Valley Express Lanes Network Figure Proposed Express Lane Entrance Configuration Figure Proposed Express Lane Exit Configuration Figure One-lane Express Lane Cross-section Figure Two-lane Express Lane Cross-section Figure SR 85 Only Alternative Configuration Figure US 101 Access Configuration (with SR 85 included) Figure Map of SR 85 Enforcement Zones and Observation Pullouts Figure Map showing Existing 2005 Traffic Volumes Figure Map showing 2015 No-Build Traffic Volumes Figure Map showing 2035 No-Build Traffic Volumes Figure Toll Rates to Maximize Traffic Demand Figure Toll Rates to Maximize Traffic Demand Figure Comparison of Measures of Effectiveness for Figure Comparison of Measures of Effectiveness for Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for I-880/SR 237 Express Connectors Page 3 of 86

4 Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for Project Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for Project Figure Program Schedule by Project Figure Detail M Figure Detail M Figure Detail M-5 Modified Ingress Figure Two-lane M-4 Detail Figure Complete Cost Estimates for various configurations on SR Figure Complete Cost Estimates for various configurations on US Figure Complete Cost Estimate for SR 237 Direct Connectors Page 4 of 86

5 1. Executive Summary The Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program (previously referred to as the High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Program) has been under development since 2003 when the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Board of Directors' Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee requested a presentation from staff on Express Lanes and their potential benefits in Santa Clara County. Since that time, the Express Lane concept has been refined, first through a Feasibility Study and, most recently, through a preliminary engineering effort What is an Express Lane? The Express Lane concept for Santa Clara County would convert the existing continuous access carpool or HOV Lanes into limited access Express or HOT Lanes that offer Single Occupant Vehicles (SOVs) a choice to pay a toll and use the available Express Lane capacity to save time. The separation, or buffer, between the Express Lane and the General Purpose (GP) Lanes is planned to be 2 feet. The buffer will be indicated by a single white stripe along side a double yellow stripe. This configuration has been used in Southern California and is planned on the I-680 Express Lane over Sunol Grade. A second lane will be configured at the access points to facilitate acceleration into and deceleration out of the facility Why Implement an Express Lane Network? Congestion within Santa Clara County continues to increase along with the cost to build additional capacity. An Express Lane Network offers VTA the opportunity to use the existing capacity to the fullest extent possible while generating revenue that covers the cost to make the needed improvements and to fund additional transit through the selected corridors. The 3 proposed goals for the Silicon Valley Express Lane Network are: 1. Efficient use of existing infrastructure 2. Mobility option that saves time 3. Source of additional revenue 1.3. Will Express Lanes Work in Santa Clara? The preliminary engineering, summarized in this memorandum, has refined the initial Feasibility Study s assessment of both State Route (SR) 85 and US 101 in preparation for environmental clearance, final design and implementation. It also addresses the initial review of implementing tolling on the HOV Direct Connectors at the I-880/SR 237 Interchange. For a one-lane SR 85 Express Lane facility running in both directions from the US 101/SR 85 interchange in south San Jose to the US 101/SR 85 interchange in Mountain View, preliminary locations have been defined and verified geometrically, operationally and fiscally. An Express Lane on SR 85 is feasible, will operate acceptably and generates sufficient revenue to cover the full implementation costs and provide for future improvements. The position of the access points is still subject to a complete operational Page 5 of 86

6 analysis and design exception approval from Caltrans. These refinements will impact the revenue estimate, depending upon the nature of the changes required. For a two-lane US 101 Express Lane facility running in both directions from just south of Oregon Expressway in Palo Alto to East Dunne Boulevard in Morgan Hill, preliminary locations have been identified and evaluated geometrically and fiscally. The combination of limited available capacity in the existing HOV lane and the large number and closely spaced interchanges makes the US 101 facility more challenging to implement. For this reason, preliminary engineering work for US 101 has lagged behind that done on SR 85. Even so, the current conclusion is that a two-lane Express Lane on US 101 appears both feasible and profitable. As with SR 85, the position of the access points is still subject to a complete operational analysis and design exception approval from Caltrans. These refinements will either increase or decrease the cost and revenue estimates, depending upon the nature of the changes required. Tolling the I-880/SR 237 Interchange HOV Direct Connectors would convert them into short Express Lanes. This implementation is straightforward, could offer immediate congestion relief to drivers stuck in the morning commute from I-800 southbound to SR 237 westbound and in the reverse direction in the evening How Soon Can This Happen? The preliminary schedule indicates that the I-880/SR 237 Direct Connector Express Lanes could be open to traffic as early as the beginning of This schedule assumes that work to secure a consultant to manage the work is brought on board in March The one-lane SR 85 Express Lanes could be open to traffic in the Spring of 2012, provided that funding to begin the environmental assessment and final design is available in January The two-lane US 101 Express Lanes facility could be open to traffic in The additional time to implement the US 101 facility is the result of time to environmentally clear the new capacity. This schedule analysis suggests that a phased implementation of Express Lanes in Silicon Valley would work. The first project should toll the I-880/SR 237 Interchange HOV Direct Connectors. The second project should implement a one-lane Express Lane facility on SR 85. The third project should implement a two-lane Express Lane facility on US How Much Will This Cost? As part of the preliminary engineering analysis, estimates of the cost (in million dollars) for each of the three projects were developed. Additional details are available in Appendix D. Page 6 of 86

7 Project Design Procurement Construction Totals 1 I-880/SR237 Roadway $ 0.02 $ 0.01 $ 0.07 $ 0.09 Improvements Toll System $ 1.10 $ 0.37 $ 3.84 $ 5.31 Implementation Project Total $ SR 85 Roadway $ 9.0 $ 1.6 $ 60.9 $ 71.5 Improvements Toll System $ 1.3 $ 0.6 $ 22.5 $ 24.4 Implementation Project Total $ US 101 Roadway $ 72.0 $ 8.0 $ $ Improvements Toll System $ 1.5 $ 0.8 $ 26.9 $29.2 Implementation Project Total $ The contingency is set at 35% since the amount of engineering is still conceptual in detail. The escalation is based upon a review of the forecasted Consumer Price Index, which could change rapidly in the current economic climate. In addition, the period to which the escalation rate is applied assumes the schedules described above How Will VTA Finance This Program? Estimated Revenue and Funding Options The Express Lane Program will generate revenue through the collection of tolls from SOV choosing to pay the posted toll rate to access the facilities. The revenue projected for each facility is detailed below. Figure provides an indication of opening year revenue after the completion of each project along with the total available at the end of Page 7 of 86

8 Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Toll Revenue Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Year Annual Net Toll Revenue (5) Project 1: Project 2: Project 3: I-880/SR237 Direct Connectors SR85-2 Express Lanes SR85-2 Express Lanes & US101-4 Express Lanes 2009 ($3,500,000) ($14,610,000) ($14,610,000) 2010 (1)(2) (1,495,500) (58,440,000) (58,440,000) 2011 (2) 91,535 (24,350,000) (24,350,000) 2012 (2)(3) 230,023 1,791,000 (105,035,000) 2013 (2) 340,275 5,066,000 (208,873,000) 2014 (2) 418,465 7,436,000 (100,812,000) 2015 (2)(4) 485,843 9,038,000 11,256, (2) 560,215 10,049,000 22,464, (2) 642,683 10,721,000 27,103, (2) 734,206 11,434,000 33,250, ,742 12,191,000 38,058, ,908 12,995,000 42,307, (6) 1,071,975 11,267,150 29,246, (6) 1,209,893 4,432,600 38,041, ,362,426 15,712,000 57,839, ,531,314 16,730,000 64,105, ,718,051 17,809,000 71,008, ,923,992 18,955,000 78,613, ,151,245 20,170,000 86,990, (6) 264,084 21,459,000 96,215, ,679,124 22,824, ,376, ,985,782 24,273, ,565, ,323,156 25,809, ,887, ,695,123 27,436, ,454, ,105,801 29,161, ,395, ,558,078 30,990, ,846, ,065,881 32,928, ,958,000 Total $37,937,319 $303,276,750 $1,207,857,750 (1) Assumes project on I-880/SR237 opens July 2010, peak periods on weekdays only. (2) Annual transactions and revenue estimates have been adjusted to reflect ramp-up during the first three years of operation. (3) Assumes project on SR85 opens July (4) Assumes project on US101 opens July (5) Annual revenues expressed in future year dollars. (6) Assumes system replacement costs in these years. Page 8 of 86

9 Historically, toll facility projects have required equity contributions outside of capital markets to be financially feasible. The analysis of the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program comes to this same conclusion. What this means is that a funding scheme that only has bonding against future revenues will not generate the needed net revenue to cover the debt service on the bonds. This does not mean that a financing plan based on bonding against future Express Lanes revenues is not attainable. The two other methods of financing are as follows: Pay As You Go In this option, the Program would be funded through State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) sources and federal sources as they become available. An assessment of future STIP funds reveals the following: Funds from STIP would not be available for the Program until All STIP funds through 2014 are already reserved for existing projects. Using all STIP funds starting in 2015 would take through 2026 to complete the Program. During this time, there would be no STIP funds available for other projects Public-Private Partnership A Public-Private Partnership (P3) is a government service or private business venture that is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private sector companies. Parties enter into P3s for some of the following reasons: project financing, early project delivery, profits, project visibility, acquiring of needed expertise to deliver project, political risk mitigation, and efficient use of resources. Although legislation does not exist in California to allow the use of P3s for tolling projects, efforts are underway to pass legislation that could provide this ability. Governor Schwarzenegger has pushed for the use of performance-based infrastructure programs (PBIs) for building and financing infrastructure projects. A measure voted down in April 2008 by the State Assembly Business and Professions Committee proposed establishing PBI California, described as a center for excellence to help determine projects that would benefit from PBI, to represent the State in negotiations with PBI participants, and to ensure transparency with the program through performance monitoring. Another Assembly bill, AB 2278, calls for consulting and legal services in the governor s Office of Planning and Research to assist local governments to set up P3s for construction projects. Previous attempts at passing P3-related legislation have not been successful due to the lobbying efforts of the Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG) that represents engineers, architects, land surveyors, and other related professionals who work for the State of California. PECG has historically opposes not only the use of P3s, but also design-build methods for project delivery based on their opinion that these methods are not cost effective. Page 9 of 86

10 Funding Project 1 Since Project 1 does not require a large capital outlay, the VTA can use existing funding sources to fully implement the project. Funding Source Amount [1] US DOT Value Pricing Pilot Program (FY 2006)* $951,000 [2] Federal Allocation for HOT lanes (FY 2008) $450,000 [3] MTC CMAQ Funds** $1,000,000 [4] VPP Grant Request (FY 2009) $3,194,200 [5] VPP Local Match (FY 2009) $798,550 ***Total: $6,393,750 * Awarded for pricing studies; plan is to submit request to FHWA to apply these funds to SR 237 Express Connector implementation; the amount includes a 20 percent local match amount. ** CMAQ funds awarded to VTA for ramp metering; request to use these funds for SR 237 Express Connectors discussed with MTC. *** This total adds $ 1M for three years of operation and maintenance to the estimated $ 5.4M cost Funding Projects 2 and 3 To continue the development of Projects 2 and 3, funds are needed at the start of These funds will cover the cost of environmental analysis, final design, and financial planning. The funds for this work must come from existing VTA sources. The balance of the funding is attainable through one or more of the following actions, which would be the subject of the financial planning. The revenue bonds could be secured by the VTA directly or possibly through the MTC. Since legislation is needed for the MTC to participate in this financing, this report assumes that the VTA would issue the revenue bonds Increase Revenue Generation This could be accomplished by changing the carpool minimum occupancy limit from 2+ to 3+, or by implementing a more aggressive schedule for toll collection Reduce Capital Expenditure Costs This is an engineering effort to identify opportunities to reduce or keep costs in check and then implement them Changes in the Debt Market The initial analysis conducted assumed conservative interest rates. To the extent that market conditions allow lower financing costs, the program would have increased financeability Inclusion of Equity Contributions Equity contributions would be upfront capital funding from any number of sources. Recent congestion pricing projects in San Francisco and Los Angeles have been granted funds from USDOT. VTA has also pursued and continues to pursue such funds. In order to reach a 1.75x coverage level for debt financing, which is a typical coverage level for Page 10 of 86

11 tolling projects to be financially feasible in the debt market, the following estimated capital would be needed for projects 2 and 3 in Santa Clara County: SR 85 Express Lanes Needs an equity contribution of $17 million US 101 Express Lanes Needs an equity contribution of $73 million There are two primary sources for additional equity, the STIP or a P3 arrangement as described above. 2. Overview 2.1. Background The Silicon Valley High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Program (commonly referred to as the Express Lanes Program) has been under development since 2003 when VTA Board of Directors' Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee requested a presentation from staff on Express Lanes and their potential benefits and opportunities in Santa Clara County. In September 2004, VTA, the regional Congestion Management Agency, received legislative authority to proceed with an environmental study, preliminary engineering, design, construction and operation of a HOT facility to replace the existing HOV facility on US 101 and SR 85 in Santa Clara County (AB 2032). With the authorization to implement Express Lanes in two county corridors, VTA has taken these steps: November 2004 Professor Asha Weinstein of San Jose State University prepared a working paper assessing the equity implications of Express Lanes for VTA. September 2005 VTA Board authorized VTA staff to proceed to the preliminary engineering phase for the development of Express Lanes on SR 85 and/or US 101 on the basis of the findings from the 2004 Feasibility Study. January 2006 VTA staff commenced the preliminary engineering phase for SR 85 and US 101 Express Lanes with the aim of identifying the first segment for HOT lane implementation in Santa Clara County. The HOT lane concept proposed for Santa Clara County and the Bay Area will convert the existing continuous access HOV Lanes into limited-access Express Lanes that will offer SOVs a choice to pay a toll and use the available Express Lane capacity to save time. In Santa Clara County, the separation between the Express Lanes and the General Purpose (GP) Lanes is planned to be 2 feet. A second lane will be configured with specific access points to facilitate acceleration into and deceleration out of the facility. An Express Lane would serve as a demand management tool using variable tolls to maximize the throughput of travelers while maintaining free flow traffic conditions Page 11 of 86

12 within the facility. Express Lanes are expected to offer continuous and reliable mobility to prospective users. Only SOVs will be tolled using the electronic technology already employed by all California toll agencies. The preliminary engineering summarized in this memorandum has refined the initial Feasibility Study s assessment of both SR 85 and US 101 in preparation for environmental clearance, final design and implementation. This more detailed evaluation has identified the best locations for access points taking into account travel patterns, geometric constraints, and traffic flow considerations. It has also estimated both the cost to construct and the potential revenue to be generated from Express Lanes planned on SR 85, US 101 and on the I-880/SR 237 HOV Direct Connectors Southbound I-680 Express Lane The VTA is currently participating in the development of the southbound I-680 Express Lane, which will convert the existing 14-mile southbound HOV lane on I-680 between SR 84 in Alameda County and SR 237 in Santa Clara County into an HOT lane. A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) - consisting of two members representing Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA), two members representing Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA), and one member representing VTA has been formed to oversee the implementation and operation of this HOT lane. The I-680 Express Lane is scheduled to be open in 2011 and is projected to generate over $80 million in net revenue over a 20-year period. The lessons learned by VTA from involvement with the I-680 Express Lane are shaping the goals and direction of the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Goals Efficient Use of Existing Infrastructure Express Lanes would provide congestion relief by making excess capacity in existing and future HOV Lanes available to SOV drivers willing to pay a variable toll. In addition, Express Lanes will ensure that improved transit service within the corridor has a more consistent travel time Mobility Option that Saves Time Express Lanes that are dynamically priced are able to control the number of vehicles in the facility by increasing or lowering the price to either discourage or encourage use of the facility. This control of the number of users makes it possible to maintain a consistent travel time during commute hours when the GP Lanes experience congestion Source of Additional Revenue By pricing the available capacity in the HOT Lane, the operator is able to generate sufficient revenue to cover all recurring and non-recurring costs, including those for collection, enforcement, maintenance, administration, preconstruction, construction, and other related system-wide HOV and HOT facility activities. Page 12 of 86

13 2.4. Preliminary Engineering of SR 85 and US 101 In order to operate a continuous access HOV lane as an Express Lane, the facility must be restriped to limit access to designated points along the freeway corridors. Since this type of facility would constitute a new configuration on the freeway, preliminary engineering is required to understand the options available for implementation. Based upon the HOT Lane Feasibility Study conducted by VTA in 2006, this preliminary engineering focused on SR 85 and US 101. To date, multiple options have been developed and subsequently eliminated or modified in an effort to arrive at a preliminary design concept that the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program can implement. The preliminary engineering considered the location of the access points relative to heavily used origins and destinations, evaluated the space constraints on the road to create a 2- foot buffer and access zones, assessed the traffic operational characteristics of the freeway with and without Express Lanes, and estimated both the cost of and the revenue from Express Lanes on SR 85 and US Evaluation of I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors While preliminary engineering has progressed on SR 85 and US 101, VTA staff has continued looking for other, more easily implementable toll lane projects. The existing HOV direct connectors between SR 237 and I-880 offer a near-term opportunity to reduce current congestion, to educate the traveling public in Santa Clara County about the value of lane pricing and to generate revenue to help pay for the implementation of Express Lanes along SR 85 and US 101. Figure indicates the locations of these proposed facilities. Page 13 of 86

14 Figure Map of Silicon Valley Express Lanes Network Average delays of 6 or more minutes are common for commuters making the transition from southbound I-880 to westbound during the morning commute. Similar delays are common in the reverse direction during the evening commute. When the new I- 880/Mission Project completes later this year, these delays would likely increase. At the same time, the existing HOV direct connectors have capacity available for more vehicles. By establishing an electronic toll collection system on the HOV direct connectors, VTA would offer SOVs the choice to use the direct connectors for a fee in lieu of waiting in the queue. This project would meet the three program goals described above. While evaluation of the I-880/SR 237 connectors has not been a focus of the preliminary engineering covered in this memorandum, some initial analysis has been conducted to determine the technical feasibility and the fiscal viability of implementing this project as part of the program Strategic Considerations Feasibility Study Conclusions To determine which of the Santa Clara HOV Lanes would be best to convert to Express Lanes as part of the legislatively authorized two corridors, a Feasibility Study was undertaken in Page 14 of 86

15 This section summarizes the findings for each of the three candidate HOT lane corridors leading to the recommendations of US 101 and SR 85 as the two demonstration project corridors. An overview of equity considerations is provided along with recommendations for addressing equity throughout planning and implementation of the HOT Lanes. The section then concludes with a specific list of next steps for moving the demonstration projects forward. The following table summarizes the findings for the three candidate corridors based on analysis in the 2004 Feasibility Study: Corridor Attribute US 101 SR 85 SR miles of HOV 24 miles of HOV Lanes from Morgan from US 101 to US Hill to SM Co. plus miles in SM Co. Typical trips HOV Capacity 2010 Financial feasibility for 1-ln Express Lane facility (2010) Geometrics Future Options Recommendation Long-distance commutes LOS D or poorer $13M to $21M/year less $3M to $5M annual O&M A 1-ln facility is possible without additional R/W. A 2-ln facility may be possible within the R/W and with structure widening Add a second HOV or HOT lane Implement first from I-280/I-680 I/C to Cochrane, since there are few limitations Proceed to preliminary engineering Potential for longdistance commutes LOS C or better $15M to $25M/year less $2.5M to $4.5M annual O&M A 1-ln facility is possible without additional R/W. A 2-ln facility will require structure widening Proceed to preliminary engineering 10 miles of HOV from SR 85 to US 101 Short to mediumrange commutes LOS C or better for all but one segment $3M to $5.5M/year less $0.75M to $1.25M annual O&M Only a 1-ln facility is possible due to median light-rail and R/W constraints plus limited access to the facility relative to corridor interchanges Wait to implement Regional HOT Lane Development Along with San Diego s I-15 Express Lanes, the Alameda and Santa Clara Lanes have spurred additional interest in HOT Lanes in the Bay Area. In July 2008, MTC approved a $223 billion Bay Area transportation plan that includes funding of a Bay Area regional Page 15 of 86

16 Express Lanes network (MTC Resolution 3868), including Implementation Principles (see Appendix H). This Express Lane Network is planned to be 800 miles long, including SR 85 and US 101 as key routes. For this reason, MTC staff has participated in the review of the preliminary engineering analysis documented herein. In addition, the possibility of using Bay Area Toll Authority toll revenue to leverage better bond rates has been evaluated in the financial analysis Implementation Plan (Project Phasing) During the course of the preliminary engineering, SR 85 was identified as the best route for the initial implementation since its HOV Lanes currently have capacity available to sell and the freeway has longer distances between interchanges. US 101 will require more environmental analysis and engineering and will cost more to implement due both to the density of interchanges along that route and limitations in excess capacity within the existing HOV facility. The differences inherent in each of the three proposed Express Lane projects - I-880/SR 237 Direct Connector Express Lanes, SR 85 Express Lanes, and US 101 Express Lanes - have made it more practical to implement them in an overlapping, sequential manner. This phased implementation is explained more fully later in the memorandum Funding Approach In October 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 574 allowing, first, the VTA to operate Express Lanes on a permanent basis by removing the demonstration status and, second, issuance of bonds backed by HOT lane program revenues to finance Express Lanes construction. The phased implementation approach makes is possible to use the earlier phases to help generate revenue for succeeding phases. The revenue analysis described below takes this into account. 3. Proposed Express Lanes Concept The typical HOT lane is separated from the GP Lanes by either a positive (i.e., concrete) or a soft (i.e., striped) barrier thereby restricting access. Access to the facility is controlled by designating specific access points and flow is regulated by changing the rate of the toll charged to those SOVs choosing to use the lane. A minimum vehicle occupancy level for free usage as an HOV (two-or-more for this study) is determined as a policy decision. The Express Lane configuration used in this preliminary engineering analysis is a single 11-foot lane separated from the GP Lanes by a striped 2-foot buffer. The stripe will be a solid white stripe to the left of a double yellow stripe, making it a moving violation for a vehicle to cross. At specified locations along each route, access points will be created to allow vehicles to either enter or exit the facility. At these locations, an additional Page 16 of 86

17 acceleration or deceleration lane will be created to enable vehicles entering or leaving the facility to adjust their speeds to merge safely into or out of the lane while allowing the continuing HOT lane vehicles to bypass without slowing down. These configurations are illustrated in Figures and Figure Proposed Express Lane Entrance Configuration HOT Lane Entry Advisory Sign Changeable Message Sign Continuous HOT Lane Addition Continuous HOT Lane Figure Proposed Express Lane Exit Configuration 4. Preliminary Engineering Assessment 4.1. Approach for SR 85 and US 101 The preliminary engineering has proceeded through these steps: Collect available data (traffic counts, as-built plans, toll system developments, etc.); Refine the VTA Travel Demand Model to represent the existing conditions; Assess the geometric constraints in both the SR 85 and US 101 corridors; Determine logical access points taking into account freeway to freeway, expressway, and major arterial interchanges as well as current congestion patterns; Page 17 of 86

18 Develop an initial set of alternatives for evaluation; Run the Travel Demand Model to assess the performance of the initial alternatives; Propose changes in configuration (develop new alternatives to address identified problems); Focus on SR 85 as the first corridor to implement; Evaluate the second set of alternatives; Propose changes in configuration (develop new alternatives to address identified problems); Agree on a preliminary SR 85 configuration for analysis (in process); Agree on a preliminary US 101 configuration for assessment (in process); As each alternative was defined and evaluated, it was assessed from a geometric and traffic operations perspective. The analysis performed thus far is described below. The work on SR 85 is more detailed than the work on US 101, making it easier to expedite the final design of an SR 85 Express Lane. Concurrent with the geometric and traffic operations work, toll operations were preliminarily defined for estimating and forecasting purposes. Similarly, initial revenue analysis was conducted to confirm that the Express Lane Program can fulfill its specified objectives Approach for I-880/SR 237 Connectors While the evaluation on the I-880/SR 237 Connectors has not been a focus of the preliminary engineering covered in this memorandum, some initial analysis has been conducted to determine the technical feasibility and the fiscal viability of implementing this project as part of the program Toll Operations Conversion of the SR 85 and US 101 HOV Lanes to Express Lanes is intended to open these Lanes to SOVs with current and active FasTrak accounts and transponders. The VTA Express Lane facilities will operate 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The Express Lanes will include multiple intermediate access points to provide equal opportunity for prospective users to benefit from stable traffic flow on the facility. However, these intermediate access points may accelerate performance degradation, particularly where only a single Express Lane must service multiple classes of vehicles that qualify for HOV status at a time when high fuel prices are expected to increase traffic volumes of vehicles that qualify for HOV status based on occupancy and fuel efficiency (e.g., hybrids). To successfully implement VTA Express Lane facilities that can handle operations and performance issues such as these, back office operations will be tightly integrated with lane operations and enforcement subsystems and activities. A description of each of these operational components is provided below. Page 18 of 86

19 Lane Operation Overhead fixed signs will be installed in advance of all Express Lane ingress locations to advise qualified HOV and SOV users as they approach an ingress point. An overhead dynamic message sign (DMS) will be located just prior to the ingress to the Express Lane and will display the current prices to travel to at most three destinations. The price to one destination would be located in the segment the user is entering and others would be to destinations in each consecutive downstream segment. The SR 85 Express Lane facility will be divided into 3 or more different segments and the US 101 Express Lane facility will be divided into 5 or more different segments. A policy inherent in the design is the toll rate displayed at the time the user enters the EXPRESS Lane facility will be locked for that vehicle for travel to any destination that is either explicit or implicit within the displayed destinations. The price(s) displayed are continuously updated (e.g., every 3 to 6 minutes) to reflect changing speed and traffic density measured at a maximum of one mile intervals along the EXPRESS Lanes and validated by travel time data that is collected from the general purpose (GP) Lanes. Pricing used to influence SOV demand results in a no worse than Level of Service (LOS) D for the VTA Express Lane facilities. An HOV ONLY message will be displayed when the collected traffic data in the Express Lane approaches the designated LOS threshold, and SOV demand is not abated by display of the maximum allowed toll. This restriction must occur before reaching the lower limit of LOS D (determined by historical performance tracking) because HOV inflow cannot be controlled. In addition, the message CLOSED would be displayed to restrict all vehicle entry due to incidents, lane blockage or maintenance in the Express Lane. A message conveying that no toll is currently in effect will be displayed when a Caltrans traffic management center (TMC) override is invoked to route vehicles into the Express Lane(s) to circumvent an incident in the GP Lanes. After entering the Express Lane facility, all users will encounter a tolling zone consisting of a single cantilever structure. This structure will support an antenna to enable communication with vehicle-mounted transponders, possibly progressive scan camera(s) to capture the rear license plate of all vehicles without a transponder (for automated enforcement and the option of validating HOV users required to register their license plate), and a transaction indicator beacon to convey user type (e.g., HOV, SOV and violator, subject to the configured System). A buffer as described in Section 3 above will be installed between the Express Lane(s) and GP Lanes. This will legally restrain users from either entering or exiting the facility anywhere other than designated locations identified by pavement markings that comply with Federal and State standards. Static fixed panel signs will be mounted on the median barrier or mounted overhead to provide advance notice of an Express Lane exit, including a list of specific interchanges immediately downstream of the signed exit. The Express Lane exit will be situated to allow a user adequate distance to safely change Lanes prior to reaching a particular interchange to exit the freeway. Page 19 of 86

20 Customer Service and Account Management Prospective SOV users can obtain a transponder through the BATA Regional Customer Service Center (RCSC) or by downloading an application that can be mailed or sent by facsimile. Users can also visit the RCSC, partnering retail outlets (e.g., Costco, Safeway) or a CTOC-compliant toll agency to complete an application and, if approved, immediately receive a transponder. FasTrak accounts opened to use the VTA Express Lane facilities will be maintained and managed at the RCSC by BATA s Service Provider. Subject to approved business rules, the RCSC will lease a transponder by retaining either a credit card number or a cash deposit. Once all prerequisites for opening an account are met, a transponder identification number and an associated account status code will be sent from a particular customer service center/account management system to all other California toll agencies on the network using the established California Toll Operators Committee (CTOC) communication protocol. This process allows the RCSC to periodically send an updated tag status list to the VTA Central Processing System (CPS), which will store and forward this information to all roadside tolling zone controllers. As a result, valid SOV transponder ID numbers can be captured and recorded in a transaction record when a car passes through a toll zone In addition to the roles and responsibilities described above, the RCSC will be relied on for transponder fulfillment and inventory management, interactive voice response (IVR) servicing to support various account management functions, and call center operations to support VTA customer service representatives answering various Express Lane account management questions SOV Transaction Processing To use an Express Lane as an SOV, the user will need to mount a FasTrak transponder to the vehicle windshield (or front bumper if necessary because of signal interference). Upon entering the Express Lane and then after passing underneath subsequent antennas, transaction records will be sent in near real time from each toll zone controller to the VTA CPS for processing and configuring trips in a specified format for communicating with the RCSC. To determine the trip charge, the VTA CPS will combine all SOV transaction records with the following characteristics: Same transponder identification (ID) number; Transponder ID associated with valid/open account (i.e., on active tag status list); and Transaction time within a configurable time period of a preceding or subsequent transaction that meets the first characteristic. The trip record will include the start trip time (i.e., time written to earliest transaction record), end trip time (i.e., time written to last transaction record), location codes representing the origin (i.e., first tolling zone) and destination (i.e., last tolling zone). This information will be used in conjunction with a Trip Price lookup table to Page 20 of 86

21 determine the actual trip charge. The trip records will then be sent to the RCSC for posting to the associated account via a batch file process for revenue recognition. Trip revenue recognition will also involve interfacing with other California toll agencies when their customers utilize the VTA Express Lanes HOV Transaction Processing To qualify for HOV status on a Silicon Valley Express Lane facility, the vehicle must be one of the following: Passenger car having two or more occupants; Transit or courtesy vehicle with no axle count limitation; Motorcycle; Registered Hybrid with a DMV-issued decal; or Inherently Low Emission Vehicles (ILEVs) with a Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) issued decal. The three options currently under consideration for qualifying a legitimate HOV user to use a VTA Express Lane facility are the following: Register the HOV license plate number, along with other vehicle and owner information, online at the VTA Website and disable any FasTrak transponder mounted to the vehicle; Open a FasTrak account with an HOV primary status and mount the transponder to the vehicle (note: this status may be temporarily changed to SOV from the VTA Website); Take no action besides disabling any FasTrak transponder mounted to the vehicle. The presence of a transponder will always result in the transponder ID being recorded into a transaction record and assessment of a toll unless an HOV status code is read. Except for the option requiring all users to have a transponder, any transponder in a qualified HOV must be disabled or shielded to avoid a trip charge Violation Processing The VTA CPS will store and forward all trip records for which the tag status is invalid for a particular transponder ID and, as applicable, for the cases of no HOV registration match found or no transponder read, to the RCSC for processing as violations in accordance with established business rules. If the option of not requiring any action by the HOV user other than disabling a transponder is selected, automated violation enforcement, and thereby processing, is not possible. This also pertains to the option requiring all users to obtain and mount a transponder if the ETS is not configured with cameras to capture license plate images. The RCSC will maintain an account for each unique captured license plate processed as a violation until all fees are paid and expiration of a configurable time period. Page 21 of 86

22 The RCSC will interface with the DMV to obtain registered owner information, generate and send out violation notices, escalate fees for nonpayment, and forward delinquent violation account balances to the DMV. The DMV will collect the delinquent balances from registered vehicle owners of an offending license plate as a condition of renewing their registration Enforcement System Enforcement Enforcement of the VTA Express Lane facilities is critical to the operational performance of these Lanes and the perceived integrity of the ETS by prospective users, particularly the SOV users who are required to pay for time savings and travel performance relative to the GP Lanes. To this end, a sign that warns potential violators of the fine for first time offenders will be posted along the Silicon Valley Express Lane facilities. For this warning sign to be effective in reducing violations, both manual and automated enforcement will be required Manual Enforcement Manual enforcement of the VTA Express Lanes will be performed exclusively by the CHP. Enforcement will most likely be performed by an officer on a motorcycle or two officers operating in tandem who will identify potential violators, pursue them, and direct them to a safe stopping place. CHP officers will most likely use the right shoulder observation pull-out upstream of tolling zones to view the transaction indicator beacon to confirm inadequate occupancy in HOVs and other violations (e.g., cars with no transponder or license plate registration). While driving within or along side the Express Lane facility, a CHP officer with appropriate equipment can safely count occupants and confirm the HOV status conveyed by the transaction indicator beacon. With either approach, descriptions of potential violators could be relayed to a downstream officer for pursuing and citing, as appropriate. In addition to the transaction indicator beacon, the following special enforcement tools are recommended for effective VTA Express Lane enforcement: Mobile Enforcement Reader (MER) The MER consists of transponder reading equipment that mounted to the patrol car (i.e., FasTrak antenna) and processing equipment inside patrol car (i.e., FasTrak reader and personal display assistant (PDA)). The MER is designed to confirm the presence of a valid transponder installed in an SOV traveling in the Express Lane. Portable Reader This handheld device is designed to read a transponder ID number from transponders that are placed in the read zone of the unit. They enable a motorcycle officer to determine if there is a match with the stored tag status list. Subject to Title 21 limitations, the portable reader can also allow CHP officers to determine the date, time, and location code of the last time the transponder was interrogated by a tolling zone controller. Page 22 of 86

23 Automated Enforcement Automated license plate image capture of violators would be particularly beneficial for the Silicon Valley Express Lane facilities because of the significant constraints to manual enforcement. The CHP has indicated a strong preference for fully automated enforcement. Such automated enforcement requires the installation of overhead cameras and lights, an in-lane trigger device, and an image processor/controller at each toll zone. Although legislation permitting automated license plate image capture for identifying toll violators is currently in place in California, applicability to Express Lane facilities needs to be determined. Another complication with automated enforcement is that there is currently no reliable and cost-effective means of automatically detecting the number of occupants in a vehicle. Near-infrared cameras, in conjunction with white light cameras have demonstrated promising results but are very expensive and prone to missing passengers in the back seat of vehicles. The magnitude of occupancy violations needs to be measured and evaluated before making a large investment to detect HOV occupancy violations automatically Geometric Analysis Geometric Requirements One-Lane Facility on SR 85 The program proposes converting the existing HOV lane along both northbound and southbound SR 85 into an Express Lane facility, extending from the southern to the northern interchange with US 101. The Express Lane would be separated from the general purposes lane by a two-foot buffer delineated with solid stripes. The additional pavement required to provide the two-foot buffer would be obtained by reducing the width of the Express lane and the leftmost one GP lane to 11 feet. Widening to provide additional pavement width would only be required at the access points. See sections and of this report for additional information on access points. Design exceptions to lane, median and shoulder width, horizontal clearance and ramp acceleration and deceleration lengths will be required to accommodate the one-lane facility as proposed. Page 23 of 86

24 Figure One-lane Express Lane Cross-section Two-Lane Facility The program proposes converting the existing single HOV lane along US 101 into a twolane combined Express Lane facility, extending from just north of Cochrane Road to the just south of Oregon Expressway. The two-lane Express Lanes would be separated form the GP Lanes by a 2-foot buffer, delineated with solid stripes. The additional pavement required to provide this facility would be obtained by reducing the width of the two Express Lanes and all interior GP Lanes to 11 feet and widening on the inside within the existing median. The width of outside and auxiliary Lanes will remain at 12 feet. The amount of widening and the inside shoulder width provided will vary depending on the existing median widths. The width of the inside shoulder provided will be at least 2 feet. Additionally, outside widening will be required at sections of the project where the inside median does not provide enough width to accommodate the proposed facility. At some of these locations, reconstruction of existing ramps will be necessary. Page 24 of 86

25 Figure Two-lane Express Lane Cross-section Utilization of the HOV Direct Connectors The existing facility provides HOV direct connectors from US 101 to SR 85. One HOV lane is provided in both directions at both the northern and southern US 101/SR 85 interchanges within the project s corridor. At the north end of the project area, the two existing HOV Lanes on southbound US 101 split prior to the northern interchange, with one lane continuing on to southbound 101 and the other one proceeding on to southbound SR 85 via the direct connector structure. The proposed Express Lanes facility would retain this configuration. A second Express lane would be added on southbound US 101 just south of the Moffett Boulevard interchange. The direct connector lane would proceed as a single Express lane along southbound SR 85. In the northbound direction, the existing HOV on SR 85 lane diverges from the GP Lanes on to the direct connector prior to the US 101 interchange. The connector lane joins the existing HOV lane from northbound US 101 where they continue as parallel HOV Lanes for a short distance before merging together into one HOV lane. The proposed facility would retain the same configuration. The two Express Lanes proposed along US 101 in the northbound direction would merge to one Express lane just south of the Moffett Boulevard interchange. At the south end of the project area, the existing HOV lane on southbound SR 85 diverges from the GP Lanes on SR 85 to the direct connector ramp with US 101. The HOV lane from SR 85 joins the existing HOV lane from southbound US 101, and both Lanes run parallel for a short distance before merging together. The proposed facility Page 25 of 86

26 would revise this configuration. The two Express Lanes along southbound US 101 would extend through the US 101/SR 85 interchange, and the direct connector lane from SR 85 would merge with the leftmost Express lane from Southbound US 101. In the northbound direction on US 101, a second HOV lane is currently introduced along south of the interchange with SR 85. The existing HOV Lanes diverge, with one lane proceeding on to the direct connector to northbound SR 85 and the other continuing on to northbound US 101. The Express Lanes project proposes to extend a two Express lane system along northbound US 101 through the interchange. The leftmost Express lane on US 101 approaching SR 85 would split into two Lanes, with one lane proceeding north along US 101 and the other diverging towards the northbound SR 85 direct connector. Prior to entering the connector ramps, vehicles will be given the opportunity to exit the Express Lane system Access Considerations Layout The 2-foot buffer zone, delineated with solid stripes, will restrict the areas in which vehicles can legally access the Express Lane facility. For the single Express Lane facility, at-grade entrance-only and exit-only access points will be provided. An additional transition lane (as shown in Figures and 2.6-2) will be included at all access points in the single-lane Express Lane design to smooth the facilities; merging between travel in the Express lane and the GP Lanes. The additional transition lane will be of sufficient length to minimize impacts to both the Express Lane and the mainline traffic. This type of ingress and egress is proposed on the I-680 Smart Lane project located in Alameda and Santa Clara Counties that is scheduled to be completed in late The layout is similar to Detail M-5 Typical Ingress/Egress for HOV facilities with Buffers 3.6m or wider provided in Caltrans High-Occupancy Vehicle Guidelines for Planning, Design and Operations manual (see Appendix B). For this project, the Caltrans detail is modified to accommodate the two-foot buffer and to provide weaving lanes at each exit and entrance to and from the Express Lane facility. A layout view of the typical access point proposed along the SR 85 corridor is also included in Appendix B. For the two-lane Express Lane facility, at-grade entrance and exit access points will be provided with an opening of sufficient length to accommodate the weaving needs and minimize impacts to the travelling public. Vehicles will be able to both enter and exit the Express lane facility at all access point locations. This type of ingress/egress is similar to those typically seen on the HOV lane systems located in Southern California. The layout is similar to Detail M-4 Typical Ingress/Egress for HOV facilities with Buffers 0.3m to 1.2m provided in Caltrans High-Occupancy Vehicle Guidelines for Planning, Design and Operations ;manual (see Appendix B). For this project, the Caltrans detail is modified to accommodate the second HOV/Express lane included in the facility. A layout view of the typical access point, as proposed along the US 101 corridor is included in Appendix B. Page 26 of 86

27 A different approach for this type of facilities is to provide a physical separation, such as a concrete barrier, between the Express and the adjacent GP Lanes. This positive barrierseparated alternative would be more effective in deterring inappropriate lane crossing and toll evasion than a buffer zone delineated only by solid striping. In order to provide such a physical barrier, however, additional buffer width, as well as a ten-foot wide shoulder within the Express Lanes, would be required. The additional widening required, along with installation of a physical barrier, greatly increases the costs of constructing and maintaining Express Lanes. The presence of the physical barrier reduces the flexibility of the system and makes it more difficult to modify the layout of the Express Lanes or provide additional lanes and access points if required in the future. For these reasons, a barrier-separated facility was not included in the analyses performed as part of this study Access Considerations Location The access points to the Express Lanes are intended to serve the major interchanges within the corridor. The need for access locations was prioritized because of the type of facilities served by the interchanges. Freeway to freeway interchanges serve a larger number of vehicles and, thus, are given the highest priority, followed by freeway to Expressway interchanges and freeway to major arterial interchanges. Access point locations were chosen after considering numerous factors, including the type of interchange, bottleneck locations, local and regional traffic patterns, traffic operations considerations, highway geometry, and safety concerns. Ingress and egress locations on the Express Lanes have been located approximately 2000 feet or more after a freeway entrance ramp or 2000 feet or more before a freeway exit ramp. This dimension provides sufficient distance for motorists entering or exiting the freeway to move safely across the freeway lanes to use the Express Lane. Where possible, the access points are located on tangent sections, away from exiting structures and other obstructions to provide clear sight distance. In general, the locations are laid out to maximize visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the system. Proposed Express Lane access locations are shown in Figures and Page 27 of 86

28 Figure SR 85 Configuration Page 28 of 86

29 Figure US 101 Access Configuration (with SR 85 included) Enforcement Considerations Adequate enforcement of the Express Lanes system is an important precondition for the system s success and needs to be considered during all phases of development. The striped lane separation proposed on this project, although potentially less effective in deterring HOV/Express Lane violators than a solid physical barrier, can be well enforced with enhanced highway patrol, electronic collection and surveillance. Work with the Golden Gate CHP Division as well as the Gilroy, San Jose and Redwood City Area offices has resulted in the following conclusions about the highway geometrics: Observation pull-outs and enforcement areas will be provided along the corridor to assist CHP officers in Express Lane enforcement. Observation pull-outs will be positioned upstream of tolling zones and will be used to identify violators via the transaction indicator beacon. They will be positioned to allow an officer protection and comfortable sight lines from the right shoulder. Preliminary locations of these observation pull-outs along the SR 85 corridor are shown in Figure Enforcement areas will be located on the outside shoulder and will be a minimum of 1300-feet long by 15-feet wide. Where possible, they will be located in tangent sections Page 29 of 86

30 and away from ingress and egress locations. Adequate sight distance will be provided. These enforcement areas will provide a safe place for CHP to pull over potential violators and verify the presence of a valid transponder. Preliminary locations laid out considering the factors previously listed and in collaborations with CHP are shown in Figure Figure Map of SR 85 Enforcement Zones and Observation Pullouts Cost Estimates SR 85 The following assumptions were made in preparing the preliminary engineer s estimate for the Express Lane facility on SR 85. This facility will consist of one lane in each direction with at-grade entrance only or exit only access points that include additional transition lane to facilitate merging: Substandard lane and shoulder widths, horizontal clearances and ramp acceleration and deceleration lengths will be permitted. No pavement widening will be required between access points. The 2-foot width required to provide the painted buffer zone will be obtained by reducing the two inside Lanes to 11 feet. Page 30 of 86

31 The existing pavement will not be cold-planed and overlaid between access points. It is assumed that the existing lane line stripe can be removed and the proposed buffer striping applied in its place. The structural section of the existing shoulders will be fully replaced. It is not known if the shoulders are currently rated for traffic loadings. Ten-foot shoulders will be provided at locations where the existing inside median width allows it. Where the existing median width is restricted, shoulder widths will be reduced as needed. At locations where the inside shoulders are reduced, the metal beam guardrail will be replaced with concrete barrier to reduce maintenance costs. Existing under-drains will be replaced, and median drainage will be reconstructed at widening locations. Three overhead signs will be provided prior to each access point. Environmental Clearance is assumed to require an assessment to demonstrate no impact and the securing of a Categorical Exception. This is estimated at 5% of capital costs. Final design costs are estimated at 15% of capital costs. Construction management is estimated at 12% of capital costs. The Electronic Toll System (ETS) cost is estimated at $500,000 per access point. The System Engineering for the ETS is estimated at 15% of the ETS implementation cost. A 35% contingency has been applied given the conceptual nature of the design details. Escalation is applied at 3% per year to the mid-point of construction. The current conceptual estimate for Project 2, a one-lane Express Lane facility on SR 85 is $96.5 million. See Appendix F for additional details US 101 The following assumptions were made in preparing the preliminary engineer s estimate for the Express Lane project on US 101. This project includes two Express Lanes in each direction with at-grade entrance and exit access point design: Substandard lane and shoulder widths, horizontal clearances and ramp acceleration and deceleration lengths will be permitted. Pavement widening will be required along the entire corridor to provide the additional Express Lane. All existing pavement to remain will be cold-planed and overlaid to facilitate restriping of all Lanes. Page 31 of 86

32 The structural section of the existing shoulders will be fully replaced. It is not known if the shoulders are currently rated for traffic loadings. Ten-foot shoulders will be provided at locations where the existing inside median width allows it. Where the existing median width is restricted, shoulder widths will be reduced as needed. At locations where the inside shoulders are reduced, the metal beam guardrail will be replaced with concrete barrier to reduce maintenance costs. Existing underdrains will be replaced, and median drainage will be reconstructed at widening locations. Three overhead signs will be provided prior to each access point. Environmental Clearance is assumed to require an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment leading to a Negative Declaration/Finding of No Significant Impact. This is estimated at 10% of capital costs. Final design costs are estimated at 15% of capital costs. Construction management is estimated at 12% of capital costs. The ETS cost is estimated to be $600,000 per access point. The System Engineering for the ETS is estimated at 15% of the ETS implementation cost. A 35% contingency has been applied given the conceptual nature of the design details. Escalation is applied at 3% per year to the mid-point of construction. The current conceptual estimate for Project 3, a two-lane Express Lane facility on US 101 is $425.8 million. See Appendix F for additional details I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors While the evaluation on the I-880/SR 237 Connectors has not been a focus of the preliminary engineering covered in this memorandum, some initial analysis has been conducted to determine the technical feasibility and the fiscal viability of implementing this project as part of the program. The total cost of implementation is estimated at about $5.4 million dollars. This cost includes the cost to development engineering plans and environmental documentation, as well as a 25% contingency. See Appendix D for further details regarding the cost estimate for this project Traffic Forecasting and Analysis Forecast Model Process and Assumptions The travel forecasting part of the study used a modified version of the VTA County-wide model to estimate the travel demand in the SR 85 and US 101 corridors. This model was Page 32 of 86

33 then supplemented with a toll forecasting model that estimated the share of traffic that would be willing to pay a toll based on the amount of time savings estimated for each trip in the Express Lanes. The VTA modeling staff made the modifications to the regional travel demand model for this analysis and validated the model for 2005 base year conditions; and then generated 2015 and 2035 trip tables using the ABAG Projections 2005 series, along with current information from AMBAG and SJCOG for other counties Model Modifications for the Express Lanes Study Modifications to the base VTA travel demand model for use in this Express Lanes analysis included changes to the following elements: Trip tables VTA developed additional trip tables for four-hour peak periods covering the time when HOV Lanes are in operation (5-9 a.m. and 3-7 p.m.), the midday period (9 a.m.-3 p.m.), and nighttime (all other hours). Networks - Network attributes for SR 85 and major feeder roads were reviewed in detail and modified slightly. In particular, the capacities of mainline links on SR 85 were increased from the 1,950 used on all freeways in the network to 2,100 vehicles per lane per hour. This was warranted based on a review of traffic counts and in consideration of the fact that large trucks are not allowed on SR 85. Capacities at metered locations on SR 85 were also reviewed in relation to current metering rates and adjusted as needed. The model was then validated to 2005 base year conditions by comparing the peak hour and daily traffic volumes assigned in the model against observed counts. The observed counts, along with additional ramp counts provided by Caltrans, served as the basis for the traffic volume profile used as data for the traffic operations analysis. Peak hour and daily traffic volumes at selected mainline locations in the SR 85 and US 101 corridors for the 2005 model validation year are shown in Figure Page 33 of 86

34 Figure Map showing Existing 2005 Traffic Volumes Modeling Express Lanes The VTA travel demand model was then further modified by the consultant team to test a series of alternative access and capacity options for the Express Lanes. The traffic assignment routines in the model were also modified to reflect the route choice decisions that are made when optional Express Lanes are introduced into the study corridor. The modeling for this scoping phase of the analysis was performed at the following time intervals: A.M. Peak 7:00-8:00 a.m. A.M. Shoulder 5:00-7:00, 8:00-9:00 a.m. Midday 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. P.M. Shoulder 3:00-5:00, 6:00-7:00 p.m. P.M. Peak 5:00-6:00 p.m. Night 6:00 p.m.-5:00 a.m Iterative Process A series of alternatives was tested in the model, with a variety of ingress/egress locations, project termini, number of Express Lanes, and ingress/egress designs. For each run, the Page 34 of 86

35 traffic demand in both the Express and GP Lanes were reviewed to identify potential bottleneck areas both in the GP and Express Lanes. Modifications to the project configurations were then recommended, and subsequent alternatives were defined based on these modifications. Following the initial set of runs, the access points that were retained for the second set of runs were subjected to geometric reviews to ensure that there was sufficient width at those locations to accommodate the access point design. Changes to access point locations based on the geometric review were also incorporated into subsequent alternatives. When the project configuration had progressed sufficiently through travel demand and geometric screening, the traffic volumes from each alternative were tested using the traffic operations model (discussed in Section 4.5.3). This analysis revealed specific bottleneck areas that were addressed both through changes to and additions of egress and ingress points. The travel demand model was then run again to produce the travel demand estimates under the final configuration Forecasted Traffic Volumes The travel demand model was run at 2015 and 2035 levels. The base no-build conditions were developed by VTA as part of the trip table generation process, but carry forward the network changes made during the base-year validation process. The no-build runs assumed the same diamond-lane, continuous access HOV-lane design as currently exists Projected No-Build Traffic Patterns in 2015 The modeled volumes under the 2015 no-build configuration are shown in Figure for a.m. peak, p.m. peak, and total weekday at selected locations on SR 85 and US 101. On SR 85, daily traffic growth is forecasted to average approximately 1.0 percent from 2005 through Growth in the peak directions during the peak hours will be constrained by capacity on the freeway and is forecasted to average less than one half of one percent per year. Traffic growth in the non-peak direction and during other hours of the day is estimated to be in the range of percent per year through On Highway 101, peak period/peak direction traffic growth is forecasted to be in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 percent per year from 2005 through 2015 while total daily growth will average approximately 1.5 percent per year. Page 35 of 86

36 Figure Map showing 2015 No-Build Traffic Volumes Projected No-Build Traffic Patterns in 2035 The modeled volumes under the 2035 no-build configuration are shown in Figure for a.m. peak, p.m. peak, and total weekday at selected locations on SR 85 and US 101. From 2015 through 2035, traffic growth is forecasted to average approximately 1.2 percent per year on US 101 and about 1 percent per year on SR 85. During the peak hours, the peak directions (northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon) will continue to grow at a much slower pace than the non-peak directions due to capacity constraints. Page 36 of 86

37 Figure Map showing 2035 No-Build Traffic Volumes Modeling Build Conditions conversion SOVs As noted earlier, the build Express Lanes scenario was tested under a range of alternative configurations to screen and adjust access locations. Currently, this screening has been performed in greater detail for SR 85 than US 101. For the tolled scenarios, the project configurations as defined under SR 85 only (Project 2) and for US 101 with SR 85 (Project 3) were coded into the highway network in the travel demand model. Under these alternatives, access for all traffic changed from the diamond-lane continuous-access HOV configuration used in the no-build scenarios to Express Lanes with fixed points of access and egress. In addition, the Express lane configuration was assumed to be in place in both directions for 24 hours a day/7 days a week. The travel demand model assigns trips from origins to destinations with a goal of minimizing travel time. For the build scenarios, vehicles that can use the SR 85 and US 101 freeways, the modified model finds two possible paths: one that uses the Express Lanes and one that does not. The non-express lane path is usually the GP Lanes on the freeway. For the tolled scenarios, the traffic assignment algorithms in the travel demand model were modified to allow SOV traffic to use the Express lane. A portion of SOV traffic was assigned to the Express Lanes using a market share procedure. For each trip that can use the Express Lanes, the market share analysis compares the toll charged for that movement to the amount of time savings offered by the Express lane to estimate a Page 37 of 86

38 cost-per-minute-saved value that is in units of dollars per minute. The model assumes there is a distribution of values of time for drivers, meaning that some drivers have a higher value of time than others that is based on trip purpose and situational factors that can vary day by day. The portion of drivers with values of time that exceed the calculated cost-per-minute-saved in the model is assumed to prefer the Express Lane route while the remainder is assigned to the toll-free route. The SOV demand for the Express Lanes is therefore dependent upon the following interrelated assumptions/inputs: Overall traffic demand (or global demand ) in the corridor; Amount of traffic eligible to use the Express Lanes based on proposed entry and exit locations; Amount of time savings offered by the Express Lanes for each movement; Amount of excess capacity in the Express Lanes that can be filled by SOV traffic; and Value-of-time distribution of drivers. The modified travel demand model is used to find the equilibrium point, at each toll rate level, between the amount of traffic willing to pay a toll and the impacts to travel time savings as traffic shifts from the GP lanes to the Express Lanes. As part of this process, traffic with two-or-more occupants are assigned on a toll-free basis and have access to the Express Lanes but are not required to use the Express Lanes. As SOV traffic shifts from other routes to Route 85, and from the general purpose lanes to the Express Lanes, the travel times for the free routes change, and traffic is rebalanced among the corridors. For the purposes of this analysis, the median value of time was estimated to be $.216 per minute or almost $13 per hour based on 1999 census data. The value of time was grown to future levels assuming inflation rates of 3 percent per year and real income growth of 1 percent per year, for a total increase of 4 percent per year. For 2015, the value of time used for this analysis was $0.402 per minute or $24.12 per hour in 2015 dollars. For 2035, the value of time assumed as $0.881 per minute or $52.86 per hour in 2035 dollars. A series of traffic assignments was run with a range of toll rates to determine the traffic that would use the Express Lanes at each rate level. The results were reviewed and the toll rate that would manage the traffic demand in the Express Lanes to a level of 1,650 vehicles per hour was identified for each time period for each direction. The resulting toll rates are shown in Figure for 2015 and 2035 for SR 85 (Project 2). As shown, by 2035, the HOV demand on SR 85 would fill the Express Lane during the peak commute hours. A minimum toll of $1.00 was assumed for 2015, which was inflated to $1.80 in All SOV traffic in the Express Lanes would be required to pay at least $1.00 to discourage short trips in the Express Lanes, and to cover transaction processing, account maintenance, and other fixed costs. Page 38 of 86

39 Figure Toll Rates to Maximize Traffic Demand Project 2, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Nominal Per-Mile Rate(1) Time Period Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.20 $0.15 $1.20 $0.40 AM Peak(7-8) No SOV 0.80 Midday(9-3) PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) PM Peak(5-6) No SOV Minimum toll = $1.00 Minimum toll = $1.80 (1) All rates expressed in current dollars. Figure shows the toll rates for Express Lanes on both SR 85 and US 101 at 2015 and 2035 levels assuming the two-lane facility on US 101 is also constructed. In general, the opening of the access on the Express Lanes on US 101 to SOV Projected SR 85 and the addition of a lane on US 101 relieves traffic sufficiently to result in slightly lower toll rates on SR 85 than under the previous condition. In general, the rates on the Express Lanes on US 101 tend to be lower than those on SR 85 due to the higher capacity on US 101. Page 39 of 86

40 Figure Toll Rates to Maximize Traffic Demand Project 3 US 101 with 2 HOT Lanes and SR 85 with 1 HOT Lane Nominal Per-Mile Rate on SR85(1) Time Period Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.20 $0.15 $1.20 $0.40 AM Peak(7-8) No SOV 0.80 Midday(9-3) PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) PM Peak(5-6) No SOV Nominal Per-Mile Rate on US101(1) Time Period Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.15 $0.15 $0.60 $0.20 AM Peak(7-8) Midday(9-3) PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) PM Peak(5-6) Minimum toll = $1.00 Minimum toll = $1.80 (1) All rates expressed in current dollars Traffic in 2015 The traffic volumes projected to use the Express Lanes on SR 85 in 2015 at the toll rates shown in Figure is summarized in Figure D-1 contained in Appendix E. The forecasted Express Lane volumes are shown separately for the SOV and HOV categories as well as the total for each time period analyzed. Since the Express Lanes on SR 85 will have separate entry and exit points, the peak load points on the facility will shift slightly from existing locations based both on the demand and access locations, but will generally remain in the more congested parts of the freeway. In the morning peak hour, the peak load point in the Express Lane in the northbound direction will be between the access points serving SR 87 and SR 17. In the afternoon peak hour, the peak load point in the southbound direction will be between the access points serving I-280 and SR 17. Page 40 of 86

41 As shown, the HOV volumes in the Express Lanes under the Project 2 (SR 85 only) are lower than under existing conditions by about 300 or more vehicles per hour, depending on the location, period, and direction. This is attributed, in part, to the change from continuous an-access diamond-lane facility to a fixed access facility, and due to a shift in routes from SR 85 to other routes in the network based on a rebalancing of traffic. Under Project 2, some of the HOV traffic from SR 85 shifts to Highway 87, I-280, US 101, and other Expressways Projected Traffic in 2015 for US 101 with SR 85 The 2015 traffic volumes projected to use the Express Lanes for Project 3 (US 101 with SR Express Lanes in operation) are summarized in Appendix E as Figure D-2 for SR 85 and Figure D-3 for US Traffic Operations Analysis Process and Assumptions A Screening level traffic operation analysis for the conversion of the existing HOV lane into the Express lane project was conducted using a FREQ macroscopic model for SR 85 only. The FREQ model was calibrated based on existing traffic volumes provided by Caltrans and existing lane geometries. Traffic operation analysis was conducted for the following alternatives: Existing conditions Year 2015 no-build conditions Year 2015 project conditions The projected traffic demand under different alternatives based on the VTA Regional Traffic Demand Model was calculated to evaluate traffic conditions under Year 2015 Conditions. Based on the operation analysis, it is projected that traffic demand under Year 2015 no-build conditions would increase significantly. It is also projected that travel congestion would increase significantly while travel speed would decrease along the SR 85 corridor in both directions during a.m. and p.m. peak periods. The analysis revealed that ramp metering in the northbound direction during the p.m. peak period would need to be implemented at the beginning of the corridor to provide acceptable traffic operations. And, in the southbound direction, ramp metering would need to be implemented along the entire corridor. Finally, ramp metering rates at existing ramp meters would need to be revaluated during both peak periods to reduce significant delays along the freeway corridor. The traffic operations analysis was conducted and measure of effectiveness (average travel speed, density, and throughput) was reported. In addition, queues at the bottlenecks were compared in different alternatives. The tables below summarize different alternatives compared with one another Existing Conditions The existing conditions along SR 85 in the northbound and southbound direction during both peak hours were evaluated using a calibrated FREQ model based on existing traffic Page 41 of 86

42 volumes provided by Caltrans and existing lane geometries. The analysis revealed significant congestion during the a.m. peak hour in the northbound direction and the p.m. peak hour in the southbound direction. The existing bottleneck locations during the a.m. peak hour in the northbound direction and the p.m. peak hour in southbound direction are listed below: SR 85 Bottlenecks - A.M. Northbound Direction Segment between Union Avenue off-ramp and on-ramp, extends to Almaden Expressway off-ramp; Segment between Winchester Boulevard lane drop and Saratoga Avenue, extends to Winchester Boulevard on-ramp; Segment between Sunnyvale Saratoga Road on-ramp and Stevens Creek lane add, extends to Sunnyvale Saratoga Road off-ramp; and Segment between SR 237 off-ramp and El Camino on-ramp, extends to I-280 Diagonal on-ramp. SR 85 Bottlenecks P.M. Southbound Direction Segment between Homestead Road off-ramp and Fremont Avenue on-ramp, extends to the start of the corridor; Segment between Winchester Boulevard off-ramp and Saratoga Avenue on-ramp, extends to Homestead Road off-ramp; Segment between lane add at Union Avenue and Union Avenue on-ramp, extends to Winchester off-ramp; and Segment between Blossom Hill Road off-ramp and State Route 87 on-ramp, extends to Santa Teresa Boulevard off-ramp Traffic Conditions No-Build in 2015 No-build Year 2015 conditions along SR 85 in the northbound and southbound direction during both peak hours were evaluated using the calibrated FREQ model and the projected traffic demand based on the VTA Regional Traffic Demand Model. The analysis reveals that, under Year 2015 no-build conditions, traffic congestion along SR 85 would increase significantly in both directions during a.m. and p.m. peak periods. It is also projected that travel speed along the corridor would decrease in both directions during a.m. and p.m. peak periods. Traffic operations along the corridor are projected to improve if ramp metering were implemented in the northbound direction during the p.m. peak period at the beginning of the corridor. In the southbound direction, ramp metering would need to be implemented along the entire corridor. Ramp metering rates at existing ramp meters will need to be revaluated during both peak periods to reduce delays along the freeway corridor. The final traffic analysis was based on the assumptions for ramp metering and the results are summarized in the table below. Page 42 of 86

43 Traffic Conditions SR 85 only in 2015 Traffic conditions for Project 2 in Year 2015 were evaluated based on the FREQ model and projected traffic demands. Traffic operations were evaluated for one lane HOV/HOT lane option with seven intermediate access points (4 egresses and three ingresses)in the northbound direction and eight intermediate access points (4 egresses and four ingresses) in the southbound direction referred to as Alternative 1 in this document. Traffic operations for Alternative 1 were evaluated assuming that ramp metering will be implemented as documented under no-build Year 2015 conditions. Traffic operations along the corridor in both directions during both peak hours are projected to improve under Project 2 with Alternative 1 Year 2015 conditions. Based on the Alternative 1 traffic analysis, the following impacts are projected as a result of implementing the Express Lanes Project 2: Northbound Direction Bottlenecks are projected to reduce along the corridor; Density during the peak period in the peak direction of travel is projected to decrease by approximately 12%; Average travel speed along the corridor during the peak period in the peak direction is projected to increase by approximately 7%; and Throughput along the corridor is projected to increase by approximately 3%. Southbound Direction Density during the peak period in the peak direction of travel is projected to decrease by approximately 3%; and Throughput along the corridor is projected to increase by approximately 1%. Page 43 of 86

44 Figure Comparison of Measures of North Bound Effectiveness for 2015 Comparison of Proposed Alternatives Year 2015 Conditions - NB AM Peak Build (6 In & 6 Out Access Points) Difference Percentage No-Build Conditions Union Avenue On-Ramp Camden Avenue On-Ramp Saratoga Avenue Off-Ramp Winchester Boulevard Winchester Lane Drop On-Ramp SR 17 On-Ramp Stevens Creek Boulevard Bottleneck Lane Add Sunnyvale Locations Saratoga Road Off-Ramp SR 237 Off-Ramp I-280 Access 85 N I-280 Loop On-Ramp Loop On-Ramp SR 237 Off-Ramp Fremont Avenue Off- Ramp Density (vpmpl) % Average Speed (mph) % Bottleneck Locations Comparison of Proposed Alternatives Year 2015 Conditions - NB PM Peak Build (6 In & 6 Out Access No-Build Conditions Points) Difference Percentage Saratoga Avenue Off-Ramp Winchester Boulevard Lane Drop Density (vpmpl) % Average Speed (mph) % Page 44 of 86

45 Figure Comparison of Measures of South Bound Effectiveness for 2015 Comparison of Proposed Alternatives Year 2015 Conditions - SB AM Peak Bottleneck Locations No-Build Conditions Build (5 In & 5 Out Access Points) Difference Percentage Density (vpmpl) % Average Speed (mph) % Comparison of Proposed Alternatives Year 2015 Conditions - SB PM Peak No-Build Conditions Build (5 In & 5 Out Access Points) Difference Percentage Bottleneck Locations Union On-Ramp US 101 (Near Shoreline Egress 92X Moffett Boulevard On-Ramp Boulevard) Ingress 94 N I-280 Northbound On-Ramp Almaden Expressway Off- Ramp SR 17 Off-Ramp Blossom Hill Road Off-Ramp Santa Teresa On-Ramp Blossom Hill Road Off-Ramp Santa Teresa On-Ramp Density (vpmpl) % Average Speed (mph) % 4.6. Findings Based on the traffic operational analysis conducted using the FREQ model and projected traffic demands under Year 2015 no-build conditions, it is projected that traffic demands along the SR 85 corridor will increase during both peak hours in the northbound and southbound direction. Such increased traffic demand is projected to increase congestion and delays and to reduce travel speeds along the corridor. Ramp metering will need to be implemented along the corridor to reduce traffic delays. Conversion of the existing HOV lane into an Express Lane configuration, along with expansion of the ramp metering program, is projected to improve traffic operations, increase travel speeds and throughput, reduce congestion and decrease density along the corridor. Page 45 of 86

46 4.7. I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors For this project, roadway pricing would be implemented only on the HOV-to-HOV direct connectors between I-880 and SR 237. The morning peak commute direction is from southbound I-880 to westbound SR 237, while the evening peak commute direction is from eastbound SR 237 to northbound I-880. The morning commute at this location has queuing on the GP lane connector from southbound I-880 to westbound SR 237 that backs up onto southbound I-880. Delays on the order of 6-10 minutes are not uncommon on the two-lane GP lane connector. This is likely due to the peak traffic demand greater than the capacity on this connector as well as the downstream congestion due to weaving between the McCarthy Boulevard entrance ramp and the lane drop at Zanker Road. When the new I-880/Mission Project is completed later this year, these delays are anticipated to increase. At the same time, the existing HOV direct connectors have capacity available for more vehicles. By implementing a toll collection system on the HOV direct connectors, the VTA would be able to allow SOV traffic the choice to use the free-flowing HOV direct connectors for a fee in lieu of waiting through the queue. The toll collection system would be electronic, using FasTrak transponders and roadside readers similar to that designed for the I-680 Express Lane currently under construction. Dynamic pricing would be implemented to insure that the direct connectors remain free-flowing. The cost to use the Express Lane connectors would be displayed upstream of the entry point to the connectors to enable SOV drivers the opportunity make their choice in time to safely access the connectors. Assumptions: Access to Zanker is eliminated for those using the direct connector; Recent traffic counts indicate that the southbound to westbound HOV direct connector carries about 870 vehicles during the a.m. peak hour while the general purpose lane ramp carries 3,300 vehicles per hour. In the eastbound to northbound direction during the p.m. peak hour, the HOV direct connector carries 680 vehicles while the general purpose lane carries 1,830 vehicles per hour. The key used to develop order-of-magnitude estimates of usage of the HOV connector include in the southbound-to-westbound direction but is allowed in the eastbound-to-northbound direction; All carpools currently on the connector will remain; Based on estimates of westbound exiting volumes at Zanker Road and other available traffic data, it is assumed 80 percent of the traffic exiting Zanker Road during the peak hour is coming from the I-880 while 20 percent is coming from Calaveras Road. The resulting weaving volume exceeds the capacity of the roadway section between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road by over 650 vehicles in the peak hour, resulting in delays that back up to I-880;; It is assumed that approximately 70 percent of the traffic on the general purpose lane ramps at the interchange are traveling past Zanker and would be able to use Page 46 of 86

47 the Express Lane connector; Travel time savings are estimated to range from 2 minutes in the shoulder periods to 6-10 minutes during peak hours; and, The westbound lane drop at Zanker will remain; Traffic will grow by approximately 1.5 percent per year through 2015 and 2035 The project will operate during peak commuter hours only, from 5:00-9:00 a.m. and 3:00-7:00 p.m. on weekdays; and Project will be implemented by July Based on these assumptions, it has been estimated that the direct connector Express Lane project could attract 600 toll-paying SOV during the a.m. peak hour at $4.00 tolls in The tolls estimated for the p.m. peak hour, with less travel delay, would be lower, with approximately 220 vehicles paying $0.50 during the peak hour. The following are possible next steps and issues to move forward with the direct connector project: Determine if this project would result in the VTA using one of its two legislatively approved corridor allocations for pricing. If so, determine if SR 85 and US 101 can be considered a single corridor for future implementation of pricing. Discuss this concept more fully with Caltrans to gain their full support. Discuss with MTC, first, how this effort could support their regional Express Lane plans and, second, the use of MTC CMAQ funds for this project. Discuss with the US DOT the idea of redirecting VPPP grant funds for this project. 5. Revenue Forecasting and Funding Options Forecasting for SR 85 and US 101 Methodology For the Express Lanes scenarios on SR 85 and US 101, the revenues for each analysis time period were estimated by multiplying the per-mile toll rate by the distance traveled in the Express Lane for each movement. This is equivalent to calculating the vehiclemiles traveled by SOV traffic in each segment of the Express Lanes and multiplying them by the per-mile rates for each specific time period and direction. Since the Express Lanes will be in operation 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, the calculated revenues for the daytime hours were increased by 1 percent to account for additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. To extrapolate from weekday to annual revenues, it was assumed that there would be 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend days and holidays. Revenues collected on weekend days and holidays were assumed to be 5 percent of weekday revenues. Page 47 of 86

48 Ramp-up factors of 0.60, 0.813, and were applied to the estimated annual revenues for the first, second, and third years of operation, respectively. Ramp-up refers to the phenomenon whereby traffic during the first few years of operation of a toll facility is less than what is achieved under normal operating conditions. This is primarily due to the fact that it takes a certain amount of time for motorists to become familiar with a new toll facility and test the waters or actually use it. Other factors may also affect revenue, such as transponder penetration levels since SOV traffic will be required to have a transponder to use the road Forecasts by Project Project 1 I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors The net toll revenue estimated for the I-880/SR 237 direct connector project is shown in Figure The estimated annual gross revenue 2011, the first full year of operation are estimated to be $468,000, increasing to $960,000 in These estimates were based on very rough and probably conservative estimates of delay and sensitivity of travel delay to future increases in traffic demand. If the toll rates needed to manage demand for the facility were to increase to the levels currently charged on the Bay area bridges, revenue could double. Operating costs are estimated to be relatively low since this is a single toll zone. Net operating revenues are expected to be positive, but it would take approximately ten years to repay capital costs. Forecasts for this project assume the following: Peak period tolling occurs during current HOV hours (5 9 a.m. and 3 7 p.m.); 400 vehicles per hour on average will choose to pay toll to use connectors; The average toll will be $2; and, There are 250 tolling days in a calendar year. Based on the above assumptions, the estimated annual gross revenue from tolling will be $1.6 million. If the average toll turns out to be $4 as it is on Bay Area bridges, the estimated annual gross revenue would be $3.2 million. Page 48 of 86

49 Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for Project 1 HOT on I880/SR237 Ramp with HOV2+ Traffic Free Year Annual Transactions Gross Annual Toll Revenue(3)(4) Total Maintenance and Operating Cost(3)(5) Capital Improvements Annual Net Toll Revenue(3) 2009 $3,500,000 ($3,500,000) 2010 (1)(2) 215,000 $181,000 $ 176,500 1,500,000 (1,495,500) 2011 (2) 527, ,000 $ 376,465 91, (2) 681, ,000 $ 408, , (2) 783, ,000 $ 435, , , ,000 $ 456, , , ,000 $ 475, , ,000 1,055,000 $ 494, , ,000 1,158,000 $ 515, , ,000 1,271,000 $ 536, , ,014,000 1,395,000 $ 559, , ,053,000 1,531,000 $ 583, , ,095,000 1,680,000 $ 608,025 1,071, ,138,000 1,844,000 $ 634,107 1,209, ,182,000 2,024,000 $ 661,574 1,362, ,228,000 2,222,000 $ 690,686 1,531, ,277,000 2,439,000 $ 720,949 1,718, ,326,000 2,677,000 $ 753,008 1,923, ,378,000 2,938,000 $ 786,755 2,151, ,432,000 3,225,000 $ 822,275 2,138, , ,488,000 3,539,000 $ 859,876 2,679, ,547,000 3,885,000 $ 899,218 2,985, ,607,000 4,264,000 $ 940,844 3,323, ,670,000 4,680,000 $ 984,877 3,695, ,736,000 5,137,000 $ 1,031,199 4,105, ,804,000 5,638,000 $ 1,079,922 4,558, ,874,000 6,189,000 $ 1,123,119 5,065,881 $37,937,319 (1) Assumes project on I-880/SR237 opens July (2) Annual transactions and revenue estimates have been adjusted to reflect ramp-up during the first three years of operation. (3) Annual revenues expressed in future year dollars. (4) Assumes project is open for tolling on weekdays during peak periods only Project 2 SR 85 Only Gross and net annual toll revenues for SR 85 under the proposed implementation of Project 2 (a one-lane Express Lane facility on SR 85) are shown in Figure Additional details regarding the calculation of revenues for this project are included available in Appendix F, Tables F-1 and F-2. Page 49 of 86

50 Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for Project 2 Project 2, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Year Annual Transactions Gross Annual Toll Revenue(3) Total Maintenance and Operating Cost(3) Capital Improvements Annual Net Toll Revenue(3) 2009 $14,610,000 ($14,610,000) ,440,000 (58,440,000) ,350,000 (24,350,000) 2012 (1)(2) 1,624,000 $3,341,000 $1,550,000 1,791, (2) 3,839,000 8,316,000 3,250,000 5,066, (2) 4,793,000 10,936,000 3,500,000 7,436, (2) 5,323,000 12,788,000 3,750,000 9,038, ,493,000 13,899,000 3,850,000 10,049, ,513,000 14,691,000 3,970,000 10,721, ,533,000 15,528,000 4,094,000 11,434, ,553,000 16,413,000 4,222,000 12,191, ,573,000 17,348,000 4,353,000 12,995, ,593,000 18,336,000 4,489,000 2,579,850 11,267, ,613,000 19,381,000 4,629,000 10,319,400 4,432, ,633,000 20,485,000 4,773,000 15,712, ,654,000 21,652,000 4,922,000 16,730, ,674,000 22,885,000 5,076,000 17,809, ,695,000 24,189,000 5,234,000 18,955, ,715,000 25,567,000 5,397,000 20,170, ,736,000 27,024,000 5,565,000 21,459, ,756,000 28,563,000 5,739,000 22,824, ,777,000 30,191,000 5,918,000 24,273, ,798,000 31,911,000 6,102,000 25,809, ,819,000 33,729,000 6,293,000 27,436, ,840,000 35,650,000 6,489,000 29,161, ,861,000 37,681,000 6,691,000 30,990, ,882,000 39,828,000 6,900,000 32,928,000 $303,276,750 (1) Assumes project opens July (2) Annual transactions and revenue estimates have been adjusted to reflect ramp-up during the first three years of operation. (3) Annual revenues expressed in future year dollars Project 3 - US 101 with SR 85 Gross and net annual toll revenues for SR 85 and US 101 under the proposed implementation of Project 3 (a two-lane Express Lane facility on US 101) following the implementation of Project 2 are shown in Figure Additional details for 2015 and 2035 analysis years are available in Appendix F, Tables F-3 and F-4. Page 50 of 86

51 As shown, gross toll revenues are estimated to increase from $8.3 million in 2013, the first full year after opening to $40 million by Annual maintenance and operating costs are anticipated to be in the range of $3.3 million in the first full year of operation to almost $7.0 million by After capital costs are taken into account, the project is forecasted to generate a revenue stream over the analysis period of over $303 million. Figure Estimated Annual Transactions and Net Revenue for Project 3 Project 3, SR 85 with 2 HOT Lanes and Highway 101 with 4 HOT Lanes HOV2+ Traffic Free Year Annual Transactions For SR 85 and Highway 101 HOT Lanes Combined Total Maintenance Gross Annual Toll and Operating Capital Revenue(4) Cost(4)(5) Improvements Annual Net Toll Revenue(4) 2009 $14,610,000 ($14,610,000) ,440,000 (58,440,000) ,350,000 (24,350,000) 2012 (1)(2) 1,575,000 $2,665,000 $1,550, ,150,000 (105,035,000) 2013 (2) 3,749,000 6,677,000 3,250, ,300,000 (208,873,000) 2014 (2) 4,715,000 8,838,000 3,500, ,150,000 (100,812,000) 2015 (2)(3) 9,079,000 18,256,000 7,000,000 11,256, (2) 14,839,000 31,764,000 9,300,000 22,464, (2) 17,697,000 40,061,000 12,958,000 27,103, (2) 19,644,000 46,969,000 13,719,000 33,250, ,739,000 52,340,000 14,282,000 38,058, ,466,000 57,165,000 14,858,000 42,307, ,223,000 62,451,000 15,461,000 17,743,050 29,246, ,012,000 68,241,000 16,089,000 14,110,200 38,041, ,833,000 74,585,000 16,746,000 57,839, ,689,000 81,537,000 17,432,000 64,105, ,580,000 89,156,000 18,148,000 71,008, ,508,000 97,509,000 18,896,000 78,613, ,476, ,668,000 19,678,000 86,990, ,482, ,711,000 20,496,000 96,215, ,533, ,725,000 21,349, ,376, ,626, ,807,000 22,242, ,565, ,766, ,062,000 23,175, ,887, ,954, ,605,000 24,151, ,454, ,193, ,565,000 25,170, ,395, ,483, ,081,000 26,235, ,846, ,828, ,308,000 27,350, ,958,000 $1,207,857,750 (1) Assumes project on SR 85 opens July (2) Annual transactions and revenue estimates have been adjusted to reflect ramp-up during the first three years of operation. (3) Assumed project on Highway 101 opens July (4) Annual revenues expressed in future year dollars. Page 51 of 86

52 Funding Options In October 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 574 allowing the VTA to operate Express Lanes on a permanent basis by removing the demonstration status and allowing issuance of bonds, backed by Express Lane program revenues, to finance Express Lanes construction. Additional funds needed to implement Project 1 and complete the funding of Projects 2 and 3 could come through revenue bonds issued by the Bay Area Toll Authority. In this way, the Program would be funded through bonds backed by tolling revenues from the Bay Area Toll Bridges. 6. Public Opinion 6.1. Summary The VTA, in an effort to gauge public sentiment about the adoption of Express Lanes for SR 85 and U.S. 101 in Santa Clara County, began a research, public outreach, and education program. The first phase has included: Interviews with a Polling and interviewing approximately 750 Santa Clara County citizens from every walk of life using the following methods. This research included: o A telephone survey of 681 SR 85 and U.S. 101 users, o 4 focus groups of HOV users and solo drivers who use both roadways, o 13 one-on-one interviews with community stakeholders, o 10 one-on-one interviews with VTA managers and staff, and o An analysis of media coverage. VTA outreach staff on participating in five public events VTA staff meetings with business, environmental and community groups to give presentations (two groups have been briefed thus far). The cumulative findings, analysis and outreach so far indicate: There are no deal-breakers for stakeholders, business and community groups, or commuters; Stakeholders are supportive; The opportunity exists to leverage ten successful such projects in operation in the U.S.; and, These Lanes will attract enough users to be financially successful, but not so many that the Lanes will be too crowded In conjunction with completion of the research, an outreach and communications strategy was drafted and presented. The strategy, based on the short timeframe prior to the December VTA board decision, calls for a focused top-down approach that would occur Page 52 of 86

53 in the October-November timeframe. This approach would ensure that key areas in the community are reached before the proposal is presented to the board for decision Perceptions The research conducted for the project brought to light a number of issues and perceptions about Express Lanes. Within the outreach phase, these comments will be addressed and clarified. These include: Drivers see rush hour traffic as a very serious problem, but less so in carpool Lanes, especially on SR 85. Leadership and the public have concerns about transportation options if anticipated growth for the region is realized. Carpool Lanes are supported 2-to-1 but only 40% believe they can hold more traffic. Among SR 85 drivers, there is somewhat less support for carpool lanes but a greater belief that they can hold more traffic. Leaders are aware of a shortage of funding for transportation while the public is skeptical and will need some education about the limited options that exist. Commuters are quick to grasp the Express Lanes concept. 56% of the survey respondents indicated initial support. By comparison, 64% of Alameda County residents supported similar projects in their county. That may be because FasTrak non-stop toll collection has already been introduced there. Similarly, the idea of a variable toll is supported by 58% of respondents. Key benefits a new choice for solo drivers, electronic toll collection instead of toll booths, carpoolers still riding for free and toll revenue going to improvements - all receive 70%-to-85% approval. Restricting toll revenue proceeds for use in the U.S. 101 and SR 85 corridors received 90% support, with 78% supporting other corridor improvements and 73% in favor of transportation improvements elsewhere in the County. For focus group participants, this was their number one benefit, including the dedication of funds to public transit support. Drivers overwhelmingly (74%) believe that toll proceeds will not be spent as proposed; but 58% believe a citizen s oversight committee will ensure proceeds are spent correctly. There is a plurality of support for keeping tolls in the $1-2 range. Awareness of success in other locations, including California, greatly enhances support. While 40% of drivers say they would not use the toll Lanes, 30%-to-40% would use them at least once a week, with U.S. 101 drivers showing more interest than SR 85 drivers. Stakeholders and users alike see Express Lanes as a way out of congestion and a way to ensure a reliable time for the commute on a long stretch of road especially for commuters travelling long distances between home and work. Page 53 of 86

54 Only 12% of Santa Clara County drivers surveyed now have FasTrak devices but an additional 25% would eventually get them to use on Express Lanes. There was concern about carpool lane cheating, adherence to double yellow lines, understanding of access and egress points and whether Express Lanes would cause accidents or bottlenecks but substantial agreement exists that dual use Lanes are an efficient approach to addressing traffic problems. The idea that tolls are a user fee, not a double tax, was agreed to by nearly two thirds of respondents. Dual purpose Express Lanes are an efficient way to make the best use of scarce tax revenue and limited land for expansion of highways. VTA is known for delivery of projects on time and on budget and is rated favorably by the public Concerns One of the primary concerns of VTA leadership and stakeholders is equity or fairness as it relates to the planned introduction of Express Lanes. Based on the research conducted, the analysis finds: Concerns about a Lexus Lane came up in focus groups and initially divided survey respondents evenly. However, once more information is given and the benefits explained the situation changes. For focus group participants, the dedication of toll revenues to other improvements in the corridor, including public transit improvements, was their number one benefit. 58% of those surveyed thought that dual use is an efficient approach. Focus group participants reported they could see how everyone could benefit from Express Lanes, whether through public transit improvements, better air quality, or improved quality of life from less congestion. Findings from a 2004 San Jose State University study support these comments. Respondents from all income levels said they will use the Lanes. 63% of drivers earning less than $75,000 per year said they would consider using them, which compares favorably with drivers earning more than $125,000 per year (53%), drivers earning $75,000-$125,000 (63%), and all drivers (60%) 6.4. Education, Outreach and Communication Strategies In conjunction with the research just described, educational and collateral communications materials were developed to address the issues raised during research. These include fact sheets, frequently asked questions (FAQs), a visual representation of how Express Lanes operate (in static and animated form), a website, an eight-minute informational video, and a PowerPoint presentation. Page 54 of 86

55 These materials will be used in briefings and customized presentations to stakeholders and the public and at community events and future public open houses. Such communications methods along with the extensive public opinion research conducted for the project should provide ample opportunity for stakeholder and public outreach and participation during this early phase of program development. Through early October, VTA community outreach representatives participated in five community events where materials regarding the Express Lanes program have been displayed and staff members have been available to answer questions. Those events included: The Silicon Valley Leadership Group s Clean and Green Conference; The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group Community Festival in south San Jose (District 2); The Let the Children Play Music Concert in downtown San Jose; The San Jose Mariachi Festival in downtown San Jose; and, The Japantown Festival in San Jose. VTA staff has also been meeting with community action, environmental and business groups to make presentations on what Express Lanes are and how they benefit the community. Through early October, presentations have been made to: Sierra Club - Loma Prieta Chapter Conservation Group, ETC Network Moffett Park Transportation Association, and City of San Jose, Department of Transportation. 7. Conclusions 7.1. SR 85 The preliminary engineering conducted thus far indicates that a northbound Express Lane on SR 85 from the US 101 Interchange in south San Jose to the US 101 Interchange in Mountain View will provide a modest improvement to throughput, time savings for participating SOVs, revenue sufficient to cover operating and maintenance costs and pay for future improvements. A southbound Express Lane on SR 85 from the US 101 Interchange in Mountain View to the US 101 Interchange in south San Jose will provide a slight improvement to throughput, time savings for interested SOVs, revenue sufficient to cover operating and maintenance costs and pay for future improvements. With the incorporation of ramp metering throughout the SR 85 corridor, the overall operation of the facility will improve and the Express Lane operation can be optimized. Page 55 of 86

56 A project to implement Express Lanes on SR 85 can proceed to the Environmental and Final Design phases once the Traffic Operations Analysis Report (TOAR) is complete. Work on the TOAR is the next preliminary engineering step. The proposed schedule completes the Final Engineering in late Following procurement, construction would begin in the spring of See Appendix A for the Program Schedule US 101 Given that the current HOV Lanes on US 101 from San Mateo to Morgan Hill have sections operating at capacity, there is value in implementing a two-lane facility. The analysis conducted thus far suggests that the construction of a second Express Lane is possible, although the specific details must be engineered before that answer can be confirmed. The potential revenue that can be generated from a two-lane facility more than covers the large capital cost to implement it. It may also prove valuable to explore the operational impact of limited access on the utilization of a one-lane Express Lane, since some number of vehicles that currently use the lane to capacity may not use it in the future due to the limited access points. If there is benefit to a one-lane Express Lane facility that can be implemented faster than the twolane concept, then a phasing of the US 101 improvements could be considered. A project to implement a two-lane Express Lane facility on US 101 can proceed to the Environmental and Final Design phases once the Traffic Operations Analysis Report (TOAR) is complete. Prior to work on the TOAR, however, the existing traffic conditions on US 101 must be agreed upon and an acceptable access configuration identified. The proposed schedule would start Environmental and Final Design work in late 2009, concluding in early Following procurement, construction would begin in late See Appendix A for the Program Schedule I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors The I-880/SR 237 interchange Direct Connector project could offer congestion relief to the general purpose lane ramps in this interchange if tolled. The revenue generated from tolling these direct connectors could pay for the cost of implementation, operation and maintenance over time, help finance further implementation of the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program and provide valuable support for transit in the corridor. A project to implement Express Lanes on the direct connectors can proceed with a turnkey or design-build approach. This is possible since the concept is straightforward and does not require a full Environmental Analysis. Procurement could begin in early 2009, with the environmental clearance and final design following in the spring of The facility could be in operation by the end of See Appendix A for the Program Schedule. A quick start on this project requires immediate funding. The following are possible funding sources: A Value Pricing Pilot Program (VPPP) grant from USDOT for $776,000 (this funding is currently slated for innovative pricing studies; a change in the use of Page 56 of 86

57 this funding would need to be discussed with US DOT staff; there is also a local match component that would push the total to over $900,000); A Federal earmark for Express Lanes for $450,000 (this is a FY 2008 appropriation so it is available to VTA now; VTA grants staff would need to file paperwork to make this funding available); A Federal earmark for Express Lanes for $2,000,000 submitted for FY 2009 consideration (a decision would likely happen after the new presidential administration is in place); and, CMAQ funding of $1,000,000 approved by MTC for VTA for continued implementation of ramp metering (the MTC would need to approve use of this funding for an Express Lane facility). 8. Recommendations 8.1. Implementation Plan (Project Phasing) During the course of the preliminary engineering, the I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors emerged as the most advantageous initial project. The lengths of SR 85 and US 101 alone make for very complex traffic analysis, adding time to the engineering effort. The I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors project is straightforward in design, of the Direct Connectors project, however, quick to produce and easy to analyze. It is also relatively inexpensive to implement. It is recommended that work proceed immediately on the Direct Connectors rather than wait until after the US 101 Express Lanes are in place. SR 85 was identified as the best route for the initial Express Lane corridor implementation since there is current HOV lane capacity available to sell, the geometrics are more favorable, and it will operate acceptably with a one-lane configuration in the near term. This one-lane option should not require a full environmental analysis, speeding up it delivery relative to US 101. A two-lane configuration appears to the best option for US 101; if this proves to be true, it will require a full environmental analysis and more engineering. The added effort and time increase the cost to implement. The scope of each of these Express Lane facilities and the estimated time to implement them suggests that the best implementation approach is a phased roll-out. The order of initiation would be as follows: Project 1: Toll the I-880/SR 237 Direct Connectors, Project 2: Implement the SR 85 Express Lane, and Project 3: Implement the US 101 Express Lane. Work on these three projects would be concurrent, but each project would be in a different phase from the others. Page 57 of 86

58 8.2. Project funding Phased implementation takes into account the estimated time it will take to implement each project; at the same time, it affords the opportunity to use the earlier projects to help generate revenue for the succeeding phases. It is recommended that the VTA Board authorize the use of the VPPP funds, CMAQ funds and a local match to implement Project 1. The next steps for Projects 2 and 3 can use the balance of the earmark and draw upon other revenue to cover final development costs. As part of the development for Projects 2 and 3, final funding packages can be worked out Board Actions To begin the phased implementation, it is recommended that the VTA Board, 1. Approve this implementation plan for the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program based on information provided; 2. Approve allocation of funds from existing sources to implement the SR 237 Express Connectors Demonstration Project; and, 3. Approve funding for the environmental clearance and final design of the SR 85 Express Lane. Page 58 of 86

59 9. Appendices Page 59 of 86

60 9.1. Appendix A: Project Schedule Figure Program Schedule by Project Page 60 of d

61 9.2. Appendix B: Striping Details Figure Detail M-5 Page 61 of d

62 Figure Detail M-4 Page 62 of d

63 Figure Detail M-5 Modified Ingress Figure Two-lane M-4 Detail Page 63 of d

64 9.3. Appendix C: Access Point Details X XX XX O Access Ok Carpool access enhanced Needs Geometric Verification Traffic: bottlenecks (land drops), congestion Geometrically not feasible With Design Exception Findings on SR Northbound Access Locations Access Point Roads and Highways Accessed Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments Cottle, Great Oaks, N79N Bernal O N80X SR 87, Almaden Expy O N79N, N80X Access Points too close, Carpool emphasized N81N SR 87, Blossom Hill O Verify geometry of modified M5 N81X Exit to Almaden XX Potential inadequate distance from SR 87. Geometric constraints (percolation ponds) N82N Almaden Camden XX O Access point close with N82X N82X SR 17, Bascom Ave XX N83N N83X SR 17, Bascom, Winchester Saratoga Ave, Sunnyvale-Saratoga Ave O O Congestion s/o Union, Verify geometry of modified M5 Verify geometry fo modified M5. Access point close with N83X Access points are close with N83N N84X I-280, Stevens Creek XX O Congestion n/o Stevens Creek N84N Saratoga Ave, Sunnyvale-Saratoga Ave XX N85N I-280, Stevens Creek O N86X SR 237, ECR, Central Expwy O N85N, N86X too close, Verify geometry of modified M5 XX O Congested between SR 237 & ECR Page 64 of 86

65 Access Point N87X N87N Roads and Highways Accessed Shoreline, Amphitheatre, San Antonio SR 237, ECR, Fremont Carpool Traffic Geometry O Check O Comments Carpool emphasized, Verify geometry of modified M5 New access added to accommodate SOVs on the direct connector. Access point is very close to N87X Access Point S Southbound Access Locations Roads and Highways Accessed Central Expresssway Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments XX The demand for this exit is not justifiable for traffic numbers to Central Expy and SR 237 (back tracking) are low. Weave not feasible due to geometric constraint. S91N SR237, ECR O S91N, S92X too close S92X S93N S93X S94X S94N S95X S95N S96X I-280, Stevens Creek I-280, Stevens Creek Sunnyvale- Saratoga Rd, Saratoga Ave SR 17, Bascom, Winchester Winchester, SR 17 SR 17, Bascom Ave SR87, Almaden, Blossom Hill XX O Congestion n/o Fremont, proximity to I -280 O Shifted some to south. O Closely space with S93N O O O S95 considered weave in Alt 5. No trace of S95X. The damand for this exit may be not justifiable Page 65 of 86

66 Access Point Roads and Highways Accessed Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments S97N SR87, Almaden O S98X Cottle, Great Oaks, Bernal O S97N, S98X Access Points too close, Carpool emphasized Access Point N1N Findings on US Northbound Access Locations Roads and Highways Accessed Begin HOT - East Dunne Ave Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments O N2N Cochrane, Dunne O N3W Bernal, Blossom Hill Cayote Creek, Bailey Carpool emphasized. One express lane. Enter HOT. Add second express lane O Enter/Exit HOT N4X Exit to SR 85 O Exit only to direct connector N5W Hellyer, YB, Capitol, Tully, Blossom Hill, Enter/Exit HOT Bernal N6W I-280, Story, Capitol, YB, Hellyer Enter/Exit HOT N7W N8W N9W N10W Santa Clara, McKee, Story, Tully Oakland, I-880 Brokaw, McKee, S. Clara, I-280 I-880, E.Brokaw, De La Cruz De La Cruz, Guadalupe, E. Brokaw, Montague, Great America, Lawrence There is not enough distance to place this access point between Story Road and I-280 There is not enough distance to provide entrance to 280 and exit to Oakland There is not enough distance to provide entrance to 880 and exit to E. Brokaw There is not enough distance to provide entrance from De La Cruz and an exit to Montague Page 66 of 86

67 Access Point N11W N13W N14N N12W Roads and Highways Accessed Lawrence, Montague, Great America, Fair Oaks, Mathilda Mathilda, Fair Oaks, SR 237, Ellis, Moffett, Shoreline, Amphitheatre Enter HOT from SR 85 Between Shoreline & Amphitheater Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments Not enough distance to provide entrance from Lawrence and exit to Fair Oaks Not enough distance to provide entrance from Mathilda and exit to 237 Entrance only Geometrically and traffic wise this exit is not possible because of the retaining walls and lane drop that exist there. Additionally there is existing GP lane congestion and high demand for the HOV lane. However there is a large demand for access to Amphitheater and Old Middlefield Rd. N17X End HOT Lanes Exit only San Mateo The addition of San Mateo - will maintain weave zones until the end of the HOT/HOV lane Southbound Access Locations Access Roads and Highways Point Accessed Carpool Traffic Geometry Comments S30X Exit HOT to SR 85 Exit only S32W Shoreline, Amphitheatre, San Antonio, Ellis, SR 237, Mathilda S34W Ellis, Moffett, 237, Mathilda, Montague, Great America, Lawrence Geometrically would work better if we don't provide exit to Ellis Page 67 of 86

68 Access Point S36W Roads and Highways Accessed Great America, Lawrence, E.Brokaw, De La Cruz, SR 87 Carpool S38W E. Brokaw, De La Cruz, Old Bayshore, I880, Oakland I-880, E. Brokaw, S40W Oakland, Mc Kee, Santa clara, I- 280/Story S42W I-280, Story, E. Capital, Tully S44W Santa Clara, McKee, I- 280, Story, Capitol YB S46W Hellyer, Tully S48W Hellyer, YB, Capitol, Blossom Hill, Bernal Traffic Geometry Comments Not enough distance to provide entrance from Montague and exit to De La Cruz Not enough distance to provide entrance from E. Brokaw and exit to I-880 Not enough room for this entrance S50W Enter HOT from SR 85 Entrance only S52W Bernal, Blossom Hill, Bailey Coyote Creek S54X Exit to Cochrane S35X renamed to S54X S56X End HOT Lanes Page 68 of 86

69 9.4. Appendix D: Project Cost Estimates Figure Complete Cost Estimates for various configurations on SR 85 Access Detail No. of HOT Lanes Description Type of Access Ave. Length of Access Point ( ft ) No. of Access Points Capital Const. Cost w/ 25% cont. Capital Const. Cost Env. Clr. Cost (5%) Design Cost (15%) Const. Mgmt. Cost (15%) ETS Design & Install ETS System Engr. (15%) Cont. (35%) Esc. 3 yrs 7/08 to 7/11) Total M-4 1 M-5 1 No widening. Signing and striping only. 1-HOT Lane with a weave lane at access points Weave $ 14.0 $ 11.2 $ 0.6 $ 1.7 $ 1.7 $ 7.8 $ 1.2 $ 8.4 $ 4.3 $ 36.8 Weave $ 31.0 $ 24.8 $ 1.2 $ 3.7 $ 3.7 $ 7.8 $ 1.2 $ 14.9 $ 8.2 $ 65.5 M-5 Modified 1 Modified M-5 detail with separate Entrance or Exit only access Ingress or Egress $ 43.0 $ 34.4 $ 1.7 $ 5.2 $ 5.2 $ 13.8 $ 2.1 $ 21.8 $ 11.8 $ 95.9 M HOT Lane on newer section of SR-85. Widening on inside only (SR 87 to I-280) Weave $ 80.0 $ 64.0 $ 3.2 $ 9.6 $ 9.6 $ 4.2 $ 0.6 $ 31.9 $ 18.8 $ M-4 Ultimate 2 2-HOT Lane on entire section of SR-85. Widening on inside and outside. Weave $ $ $ 5.6 $ 16.8 $ 16.8 $ 10.2 $ 1.5 $ 57.0 $ 33.4 $ M-5 Modified Ultimate 2 2-HOT Lane on entire section of SR-85. Widening on inside and outside. Modified M-5 detail with separate Entrance or Exit only access Ingress or Egress $ $ $ 6.6 $ 19.8 $ 19.8 $ 10.2 $ 1.5 $ 66.5 $ 39.1 $ **This does not reflect large R/W Capital costs. Page 69 of d

70 Figure Complete Cost Estimates for various configurations on US 101 Ave. Length No. of No. of Access Type of of HOT Description Access Detail Access Access Lanes Points Point ( ft ) Capital Const. Cost Enviro. Clr. Cost (15%) Design Cost (15%) Const. Mgmt. Cost (15%) ETS Design & Install ETS System Engr. (15%) Cont. (35%) Esc. 5 yrs 7/08 to 7/13) Total M-5 Modified 1 Modified M-5 detail with separate Entrance or Exit only access Ingress or Egress $ 20.8 $ 3.1 $ 3.1 $ 3.1 $ 10.2 $ 1.5 $ 14.7 $ 13.1 $ 69.7 M-4 Ultimate 1 & 2 2-HOT Lane on entire section of SR-101. Widening on inside and outside. Weave $117.6 $ 17.6 $ 17.6 $17.6 $ 15.0 $ 2.3 $ 65.7 $ 63.8 $317.3 M-4 Ultimate 2 2-HOT Lane on entire section of SR-101. Widening on inside and outside. Weave $157.6 $ 23.6 $ 23.6 $23.6 $ 15.0 $ 2.3 $ 86.0 $ 84.2 $416.0 M-5 Modified Ultimate 2 2-HOT Lane on entire section of SR-85. Widening on inside and outside. Modified M-5 detail with separate Entrance or Exit only access Ingress or Egress $177.6 $ 26.6 $ 26.6 $26.6 $ 10.2 $ 1.5 $ 94.2 $ 93.3 $456.7 **This does not reflect large R/W Capital costs. Page 70 of d

71 Figure Complete Cost Estimate for SR 237 Direct Connectors Dir. Item Qty Unit Unit Cost Subtotal Planning, Design, and Implementation: Pavement Delineation Remove Exiting 2" Yellow Stripe 6600 LF $1 $6,600 WB Remove Exiting Pavement Marker 139 EA $10 $1,390 Install 2" Yellow Stripe 6600 LF $1 $6,600 Double Yellow Striping (2" Inch Stripe) LF $2 $26,400 Pavement Delineation Subtotal: $40,990 Typical Antenna/Reader Station Furnish & Install Model 332 Controller Assembly 2 EA $20,000 $40,000 Furnish & Install Type III Service Cabinet 2 EA $10,000 $20,000 Furnish & Install Battery Backup 2 EA $5,000 $10,000 Both Furnish & Install Pole/Foundation 2 EA $100,000 $200,000 Furnish & Install 3" Conduit + Conductors 5280 LF $70.00 $369,600 Furnish & Install Pull Box 1 EA $300 $300 Modem Assembly 2 EA $2,000 $4,000 Antenna/Reader Station Subtotal: $643,900 Traffic Count Stations Furnish & Install Model 332 Controller Assembly 2 EA $10,000 $20,000 Furnish & Install Battery Backup 2 EA $5,000 $10,000 Both Furnish & Install Traffic Loops 2 EA $1,000 $2,000 Furnish & Install 3" Conduit + Conductors 2112 LF $70.00 $147,840 Furnish & Install Pull Box 11 EA $300 $3,300 Traffic Count Stations Subtotal: $183,140 Dynamic Message Signs Furnish & Install Model 332 Controller Assembly 4 EA $20,000 $80,000 Furnish & Install Battery Backup 4 EA $5,000 $20,000 Both Furnish & Install DMS 4 EA $210,000 $840,000 Furnish & Install 3" Conduit + Conductors 4000 LF $70 $280,000 Furnish & Install Pull Box 20 EA $300 DMS Subtotal: $6,000 $1,226,000 CCTV Camera Camera Unit 2 EA $7,000 $14,000 Both Pan and Tilt Unit 2 EA $3,000 $6,000 Camera Control Unit 2 EA $4,000 $8,000 Video Encoder Unit 2 EA $15,000 $30,000 CCTV Camera Subtotal: $58,000 Central Operations Both Furnish & Install Central Computer System 1 EA $100,000 $100,000 Central Operations Subtotal: $100,000 Engineering & Environmental Planning PA/ED 1 LS $438,806 $438,806 Both PSE 1 LS $548,508 $548,508 VTA Staff Oversight 1 LS $438,806 $438,806 Engineering & Environmental Planning Subtotal: $1,426,120 Evaluations Both Outside Consultant 1 LS $121,850 $121,850 Evaluations Subtotal: $121,850 Operations, Management, and Maintenance Both Toll Collection Staff: 3 YR $283,333 $850,000 VTA Staff Oversight 3 YR $50,000 $150,000 *Operations, Management, and Maintenance Subtotal: $1,000,000 Public Outreach Program Both Outside Consultant 1 LS $315,000 $315,000 Public Outreach Program Subtotal: $315,000 Subtotal Construction Cost: 25% Contingency: Total Construction Cost: Total Construction Cost Less *O&M Costs: $5,115,000 $1,278,750 $6,393,750 $5,393,750 Page 71 of 86

72 9.5. Appendix E: Traffic Forecasts Page 72 of d

73 Page 73 of d

74 Page 74 of d

75 Page 75 of d

76 9.6. Appendix F: Revenue Forecast Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue HOT on I880/SR237 Ramp with HOV2+ Traffic Free Eastbound Direction Weekday Traffic Estimated Nominal Toll Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) $ $75 $18,800 AM Peak(8-9) ,500 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) , , ,800 PM Peak(5-6) ,600 Total Daytime 2, ,210 $310 $77,700 Westbound Direction Weekday Traffic Estimated Nominal Toll Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) $0.50 2,030 2,000 4,030 $1,000 $250,600 AM Peak(8-9) , ,600 2, ,300 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,800 PM Peak(5-6) ,500 Total Daytime 3,740 2,850 6,590 $3,525 $883,200 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) 2,300 2,150 4,450 $0.50 $1,075 $269,400 AM Peak(8-9) 1, , , ,800 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 1, , ,600 PM Peak(5-6) , ,100 Total Daytime 6,330 3,470 9,800 $1.11 $3,835 $960,900 Assumptions: Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,600 vehicles per hour; Toll zone will be set up to capture tolled traffic traveling southbound-westbound and northbound-eastbound on the HOV lane direct connector ramps at the SR237/I-880 interchange, with a minimum toll assumed to be $0.50 in 2015 and $1.00 in Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 76 of 86

77 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue HOT on I880/SR237 Ramp with HOV2+ Traffic Free Eastbound Direction Weekday Traffic Estimated Nominal Toll Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) $ $200 $50,100 AM Peak(8-9) ,400 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,900 1,400 3,300 1, ,800 PM Peak(5-6) , ,600 3, ,900 Total Daytime 3,510 2,870 6,380 $5,720 $1,433,200 Westbound Direction Weekday Traffic Estimated Nominal Toll Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) $6.00 2,725 2,000 4,725 $12,000 $3,006,600 AM Peak(8-9) , ,600 3, ,800 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,040 1,690 1, ,600 PM Peak(5-6) ,290 1,600 2, ,400 Total Daytime 5,005 4,610 9,615 $18,980 $4,755,400 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-8) 3,085 2,200 5,285 $5.55 $12,200 $3,056,700 AM Peak(8-9) 1, , ,060 1,017,200 Midday(9-3) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 2,550 2,440 4, , ,400 PM Peak(5-6) 1,340 1,860 3, ,000 1,503,300 Total Daytime 8,515 7,480 15,995 $3.30 $24,700 $6,188,600 Assumptions: Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,600 vehicles per hour; Toll zone will be set up to capture tolled traffic traveling southbound-westbound and northbound-eastbound on the HOV lane direct connector ramps at the SR237/I-880 interchange, with a minimum toll assumed to be $0.50 in 2015 and $1.00 in Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 77 of 86

78 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue SR 85 HOT Lanes Project 2, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.20 4,223 3,218 7,441 $2.04 $6,567 $1,679,500 AM Peak(7-8) ,908 1,563 3, ,576 1,426,100 Midday(9-3) ,677 1,159 9, , ,000 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,712 3,366 8, ,153 1,573,600 PM Peak(5-6) ,342 1,865 3, ,152 1,061,900 Total Daytime 20,862 11,171 32,033 $2.17 $24,274 $6,208,100 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.15 2, ,621 $1.10 $34 $8,700 AM Peak(7-8) , , , ,100 Midday(9-3) ,335 1,119 7, , ,400 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,034 5,798 9, ,793 3,783,300 PM Peak(5-6) ,250 2,220 3, ,948 2,288,500 Total Daytime 15,388 10,040 25,428 $2.65 $26,635 $6,812,000 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 6,813 3,249 10,062 $2.03 $6,601 $1,688,200 AM Peak(7-8) 3,087 2,435 5, ,890 1,762,200 Midday(9-3) 15,012 2,278 17, , ,400 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 8,746 9,164 17, ,946 5,356,900 PM Peak(5-6) 2,592 4,085 6, ,100 3,350,400 Total Daytime 36,250 21,211 57,461 $2.40 $50,909 $13,020,100 Total Weekday (add 1%) 21,400 $51,400 $13,150,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR85/Bernal/US101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 78 of 86

79 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue Project 2, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $1.20 6,576 1,481 8,057 $10.93 $16,192 $4,141,100 AM Peak(7-8) No SOV 3, , Midday(9-3) ,664 5,043 15, ,691 4,780,200 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,648 3,289 8, ,162 6,179,400 PM Peak(5-6) ,631 2,088 3, ,345 3,924,500 Total Daytime 28,328 11,901 40,229 $6.25 $74,390 $19,025,200 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.40 3, ,444 $3.09 $2,567 $656,500 AM Peak(7-8) , , ,790 1,736,500 Midday(9-3) ,223 6,862 15, ,845 6,609,900 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,727 2,274 9, ,597 11,405,700 PM Peak(5-6) No SOV 2, , Total Daytime 23,198 10,895 34,093 $7.32 $79,799 $20,408,600 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 10,188 2,313 12,501 $8.11 $18,759 $4,797,600 AM Peak(7-8) 5, , ,790 1,736,500 Midday(9-3) 18,887 11,905 30, ,536 11,390,100 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 12,375 5,563 17, ,759 17,585,100 PM Peak(5-6) 4,629 2,088 6, ,345 3,924,500 Total Daytime 51,526 22,796 74,322 $6.76 $154,189 $39,433,800 Total Weekday (add 1%) 23,000 $155,700 $39,828,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR85/Bernal/US101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 79 of 86

80 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue Project 3, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.20 4,576 2,829 7,405 $1.91 $5,396 $1,380,000 AM Peak(7-8) ,065 1,646 3, ,053 1,292,300 Midday(9-3) , , , ,300 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,350 3,725 9, ,520 1,411,700 PM Peak(5-6) ,553 1,950 3, , ,000 Total Daytime 22,697 10,927 33,624 $1.88 $20,541 $5,253,300 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.15 2, ,638 $1.11 $39 $10,000 AM Peak(7-8) , , , ,800 Midday(9-3) ,392 1,098 7, , ,100 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,396 5,974 10, ,142 2,849,600 PM Peak(5-6) ,427 2,229 3, ,135 1,824,800 Total Daytime 16,090 10,096 26,186 $2.07 $20,869 $5,337,300 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 7,179 2,864 10,043 $1.90 $5,435 $1,390,000 AM Peak(7-8) 3,337 2,406 5, ,155 1,574,100 Midday(9-3) 15,545 1,875 17, , ,400 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 9,746 9,699 19, ,662 4,261,300 PM Peak(5-6) 2,980 4,179 7, ,576 2,704,800 Total Daytime 38,787 21,023 59,810 $1.97 $41,410 $10,590,600 Total Weekday (add 1%) 21,200 $41,800 $10,697,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR85/Bernal/US101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 80 of 86

81 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue Project 3, Highway 101 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.15 7,027 6,735 13,762 $1.76 $11,838 $3,027,600 AM Peak(7-8) ,293 5,275 8, ,278 4,163,100 Midday(9-3) , , ,600 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,213 6,532 13, ,224 1,847,500 PM Peak(5-6) ,280 4,333 6, ,566 1,423,500 Total Daytime 30,619 23,576 54,195 $1.77 $41,710 $10,667,300 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.15 4,885 1,406 6,291 $0.96 $1,346 $344,200 AM Peak(7-8) ,340 3,051 5, , ,700 Midday(9-3) ,410 1,924 12, , ,200 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,536 13,612 23, ,676 8,356,900 PM Peak(5-6) ,001 5,520 8, ,007 5,116,800 Total Daytime 30,172 25,513 55,685 $2.34 $59,624 $15,248,800 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 11,912 8,141 20,053 $1.62 $13,184 $3,371,800 AM Peak(7-8) 5,633 8,326 13, ,831 5,071,800 Midday(9-3) 21,216 2,625 23, , ,800 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 16,749 20,144 36, ,900 10,204,400 PM Peak(5-6) 5,281 9,853 15, ,573 6,540,300 Total Daytime 60,791 49, ,880 $2.06 $101,334 $25,916,100 Total Weekday (add 1%) 49,600 $102,300 $26,175,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR 85/Bernal/US 101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 81 of 86

82 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue Project 3, SR 85 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $1.20 6,574 1,711 8,285 $11.73 $20,071 $5,133,200 AM Peak(7-8) No SOV 2, , Midday(9-3) ,584 6,786 17, ,095 4,116,300 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,410 3,402 9, ,825 5,837,500 PM Peak(5-6) ,003 2,089 4, ,955 3,569,000 Total Daytime 27,665 13,988 41,653 $5.21 $72,946 $18,656,000 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.40 3, ,925 $3.42 $900 $230,200 AM Peak(7-8) , , ,887 1,505,600 Midday(9-3) ,153 8,600 16, ,256 5,180,500 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,780 2,334 9, ,945 10,983,200 PM Peak(5-6) No SOV 1, , Total Daytime 21,861 12,033 33,894 $5.82 $69,988 $17,899,500 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 10,236 1,974 12,210 $10.62 $20,971 $5,363,400 AM Peak(7-8) 3, , ,887 1,505,600 Midday(9-3) 18,737 15,386 34, ,351 9,296,800 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 13,190 5,736 18, ,770 16,820,700 PM Peak(5-6) 3,514 2,089 5, ,955 3,569,000 Total Daytime 49,526 26,021 75,547 $5.49 $142,934 $36,555,500 Total Weekday (add 1%) 26,300 $144,400 $36,921,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR 85/Bernal/US 101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 82 of 86

83 Table F Estimated Traffic and Gross Toll Revenue Project 3, Highway 101 HOT Lanes with HOV2+ Traffic Free Northbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $ ,800 12,083 22,883 $5.30 $64,037 $16,377,500 AM Peak(7-8) ,424 10,828 16, ,806 20,410,400 Midday(9-3) ,241 16,497 31, ,207 7,981,200 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,327 12,635 21, ,381 9,048,700 PM Peak(5-6) ,108 6,784 9, ,593 8,079,900 Total Daytime 43,900 58, ,727 $4.11 $242,024 $61,897,700 Southbound Direction Nominal Weekday Traffic Estimated Per-Mile Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Rate Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) $0.20 6,971 6,947 13,918 $1.44 $9,974 $2,550,900 AM Peak(7-8) ,830 9,216 13, ,313 5,450,800 Midday(9-3) ,559 24,191 39, ,538 11,902,100 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) ,837 10,133 26, ,428 41,541,000 PM Peak(5-6) ,150 7,218 14, ,680 58,229,200 Total Daytime 50,347 57, ,052 $8.11 $467,933 $119,674,000 Both Directions Weekday Traffic Estimated Toll Average Weekday Annual Period Free Tolled Total Toll Rate Revenue Toll Revenue AM Shoulder(5-7,8-9) 17,771 19,030 36,801 $3.89 $74,011 $18,928,400 AM Peak(7-8) 9,254 20,044 29, ,119 25,861,200 Midday(9-3) 30,800 40,688 71, ,745 19,883,300 PM Shoulder(3-5,6-7) 26,164 22,768 48, ,809 50,589,700 PM Peak(5-6) 10,258 14,002 24, ,273 66,309,100 Total Daytime 94, , ,779 $6.09 $709,957 $181,571,700 Total Weekday (add 1%) 117,700 $717,100 $183,387,000 Assumptions: 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekends/holidays. Daily revenues collected on weekends/holidays are 5% of weekday revenues. 1% additional revenue collected during nighttime hours. Used VTA networks and trip tables as sent in April 2008 but with correction to ramp meter locations and capacities at SR 85/Bernal/US 101 interchange; Value of time - $.402 per minute in 2015 and $0.881 per minute in We assumed 3 percent inflation and 1 percent real income growth (less than actual observations); HOV2+ traffic free in HOT lanes and do not require a transponder to use the lanes; Trucks are not allowed to use the HOT lanes; Maximum desired volume in the HOT lanes is 1,650 vehicles per hour; Tolls will be calculated based on point of entry and point of exit for all tolled traffic, with a minimum toll assumed to be $1.00 in 2015 and $1.80 in all movements pay a minimum of this amount. No maximum toll assumed; Weekday traffic and revenue estimates were expanded to annual levels assuming 250 equivalent weekdays and 115 weekend/holidays. Revenues on weekend/holidays were assumed to generate revenue equal to 5 percent of weekday revenues. Ramp up assumptions of.60,.80, and.945 were applied to the first three years of revenues to reflect the time in which it will take the public to acquire transponders and become comfortable with use of the HOT lanes. Page 83 of 86

84 9.7. Appendix G: MTC Express Lane Implementing Principles Page 84 of 86

85 Page 85 of d

86 Page 86 of d